Vietnam War Notes

Attitudes to the Vietnam War
(Mirams et al)
Australia's involvement in the Vietnam conflict: 1965 – 1970
Between 1965 and 1970 Australians' attitudes to their country's involvement in the Vietnam War changed
The opposition grew as events of the war unfolded over the following five years
Those opposing both conscription and Australia's involvement in Vietnam expanded from small groups of university students and peace activists to a broad section of the community.
The Vietnam Moratorium of 1970 attracted thousands of people who had never been in a demonstration before and had never protested on any issue

The Vietnam War and Australia's security interests
Vietnam was a French colony from the late 1800s to the Second World War when the Japanese invaded and consequently occupied it
After the defeat of the Japanese in 1945 there was widespread support in Vietnam for independence and the right to govern themselves
Groups in Vietnam had been working for independence since the early 1920s
Ho Chi Minh founded the Indo-Chinese Communist Party in 1931
During the war he established the Viet Minh, or the Revolutionary League for the Independence of Vietnam
A nine-year war took place between the French and the forces of Ho Chi Minh, but the French were defeated at Dien Bien Phu in 1954
A peace meeting took place in Geneva (Switzerland), where the French agreed to withdraw from Indochina if the Vietnamese communists ceased fire
Consequently Vietnam was temporarily divided into two zones separated at the 17th Parallel
All participants at the Geneva Conference except the United States and South Vietnam accepted the agreements
Elections never took place as America feared "they would have resulted in an overwhelming victory for Ho Chi Minh"
Consequently a civil war broke out between North and South Vietnam. Their struggle was caught up in the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union, so the South was supported by America and the North was supported by both the Soviet Union and the Chinese government.
Australia's security concerns
Australia's concern was with the possible expansion of Communist China
This fear was furthered by the possibility that communist movements in South-East Asian countries might come to power and spread to other neighbouring countries like a 'chain reaction', all the while coming increasingly closer to Australia
This was known as "The Domino Theory"
Australia was in anew region of independent Asian states and the Cold War meant that Australia's response to particular Asian countries was related to its fear of communism
Australia formulated its forward defence strategy in the 1950s this ensured that the region remained stable and any potential threat to Australia was defeated well before it could get to Australia
Australia did not have the military resources or population to fight by itself
It consequently encouraged Britain to remain in the region and the United States to intervene in Indochina the view of the strategy was that the more Australia supported the United States the more obligation the United States would have to Australia, a debt that could be called upon should Australia be attacked

The problem of Vietnam is one, it seems, where we could… pick up a lot of credit with the United States for the problem is one to which the United States is deeply committed and in which it genuinely feels it is carrying too much of the load, not so much the physical load which the United States is prepared to bear, as the moral load.
Alan Renouf (Diplomat)
In Cablegram to Canberra
November 1964 Conscription
Sir Robert Menzies announced selective compulsory service (conscription) on 10 November this applied to 20-year-old males and the expansion of the defence forces from approximately 22, 000 to 37, 500 men
Menzies explained that this expansion could not be achieved by young men voluntarily joining the army because the existing prosperity and full employment made civilian life too attractive
He argued the decision was made because of "the paramount needs of defence and… the preservation of our security"
The method of selection was to be by ballot based on birthdates drawn out of a barrel
The conscripts could not vote and they would not receive the same pay as soldiers in the regular army, although they would face the same dangers
Labor party leader Arthur Calwell immediately opposed conscription for service overseas during peacetime and objected to the method of selection
Calwell rejected Menzies suggestion that voluntary recruitment had failed and pointed out that many applicants to the army had been refused on educational grounds and that this could be overcome if the government would give them an opportunity to gain the basic education required
He also predicted that the system would be abused by those in elite and powerful positions obtaining exemptions for their sons
April 1965: War in April 1965, just four months after the introduction of conscription, Sir Robert Menzies announced that Australia would be sending a troop battalion to Vietnam
A (small) number of Australian military advisors had been in Vietnam since 1962 assisting with the training of South Vietnamese troops
This number had increased to 80 personnel by June 1964

The Australian Government is now in receipt of a request from the Government of South Vietnam for further military assistance. We have decided – and this has been after close consultation with the Government of the United States – to provide an infantry for service in South Vietnam. The takeover of South Vietnam would be a direct military threat to Australia and all the countries of South and South East Asia. It must be seen as part of a thrust by Communist China between the Indian and Pacific Oceans…
Sir Robert Menzies, House of Representatives, 10 November 1964

The Government argued that: the South Vietnamese government had requested assistance the United States government had requested Australia's involvement in the war and they were our ally the war would prevent spread of communism through the Domino Theory the war would stop Communist China who represented a direct military threat to Australia and other South-East Asian Countries the war would fulfil Australia's obligations under the ANZUS and SEATO treaties

Michael Sexton argues that by far the strongest reason was the Australian government's desire for the United States to maintain a military presence in South-East Asia
Menzies was also convinced that if Australia supported the United States in a war then the United States would feel obligated to return the debt
Historical analysts suggest this is the wrong thinking, as decisions in the United States were shaped by their own interests and domestic politics
The South Vietnamese government did not initiate the request for assistance from Australia. It was engineered by the Australian government and was successful only with the support of America

Arthur Calwell opposed this commitment in Parliament:
We do not think it is a wise decision. We do not think it is a timely decision. We do not think it is a right decision. We do not think it will help fight against Communism. On the contrary, we believe it will harm that fight in the long term. We do not believe it will promote the welfare of the people of Vietnam. On the contrary, we believe it will prolong and deepen the suffering of that unhappy people… We do not believe that it represents a… intelligent response to the challenge of Chinese power. On the contrary, we believe it mistakes entirely the nature of that power. We of the (Labor) party do not believe that this decision serves or is consistent with, the immediate strategic interests of Australia. On the contrary… the Government dangerously denudes Australia and its immediate strategic environs of effective defence power…
Arthur Calwell, House of Representatives, 4 May 1965

He also stated that "The war in South Vietnam is a civil war, aided and abetted by the North Vietnamese Government, but neither created nor principally maintained by it" and added that "Our present course is playing right into China's hands, and our present policy will, if not changed, surely and inexorably lead to American humiliation in Asia"
Editorials
All but two daily newspapers supported the sending of troops to Vietnam
The Australian and The Daily Mirror were critical of the decision

The Menzies Government has made a reckless decision on Vietnam which the nation may live to regret. It has decided to send Australian soldiers into a savage, revolutionary war in which the Americans are grievously involved… Their decision is wrong, at this time, whichever way we look at it. It is wrong because Australia's contingent can have only insignificant military value, because it will be purely a political pawn in a situation for which Australia has no responsibility whatsoever… It is wrong because it deliberately and coldly runs counter to the mounting wave of international anxiety about the shape of the Vietnam war and the justification and perils of America's military escalation… Neither of the Pacific defence treaties to which Australia subscribes can honestly be invoked to justify the Menzies Government's decision…
It could be that our historians will recall this day with tears.
The Australian, 30 April 1965

The decision by the Australian Government to send a battalion to South Vietnam is a grave one and commits Australia to a more direct role in this cockpit of war where the conflict for power between Communist China and the West in South-East Asia has been joined… These are inescapable obligations which fall on us because of our geographical position, our treaty commitments and our friendships… There is clearly a United States call to share, even in a small way, more of the burdens… There was no alternative but to respond as we have.
The Age, 30 April 1965
Opposition to the war
Supports of the war include Liberal Party supporters, the Returned Servicemen's League and some religious groups, who believed it was a fight against the spread of communism and that Australia's security was threatened
According to the opposition (ALP), Australia's defence will be compromised in two ways; we will make enemies out of all Asia including China – Australia's very name may become a term of reproach among them
As soon as Menzies announced the introduction of conscription and the sending of troops to Vietnam, protest groups sprang up all over the country to work to overturn these measures
An exemption from conscription was provided for those who were prepared to come before the courts and prove that they were pacifists
There was no exemption for the men who believed the Vietnam War was unjust
The Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) changed their names
The Victorian CND became the Vietnam Day Committee the NSW CND became the Vietnam Action Committee
One of the first groups to be set up was Save Our Sons
Save Our Sons
The SOS movement was formed in 1965 by women seeking the repeal of the National Service Act
SOS campaigned against conscription, supported draft resisters and those who were charged in court with resisting conscription
They protested against the war in Vietnam, raised money, spoke on behalf of conscientious objectors at rallies, seminars and 'teach ins' and handed out anti-conscription leaflets
In their protest activities these women often met abuse and ridicule
The accusation of being a 'communist' was one that was used frequently against anyone opposing the war in Vietnam and Australia's involvement in it
They were energetic and as women attracted attention
Although there were male members, women held all office-holder positions
The Youth Campaign Against Conscription (YCAC)
(unsurprisingly) many activists against conscription and the Vietnam War were young people
One of the first groups to form was the Youth Campaign Against Conscription which organised on university campuses and demonstrated outside the United States consulate
In June 1965 it published an advertisement signed by 144 men of conscription age which was published in The Australian (newspaper)

The undersigned young Australian male citizens being of an age making us liable for military service, declare that WE OPPOSE OVERSEAS CONSCRIPTION because:
We believe that we may be sent to fight in Vietnam… This would be a moral wrong and an unjust call upon our lives by the government of our country. We share a fundamental belief that to safeguard the future of our nation, Australia's ole in these perilous times is to seek an end to South East Asian disputes, through negotiations for peaceful settlements – not to pursue the murderous path to world conflict through prolonging the slaughter in Vietnam.
I support the campaign against overseas conscription
The Australian, 19 June 1965

Looking back, my being called up and going away for two years was never an issue for my parents, my bosses, or the locals. The National Service debate was never a topic of argument or discussion. It was endorsed by the Country Party, so that was that.

For the first time some of the old diggers came over and spoke to me. I felt privileged.
Barry Heard, conscripted in 1965
Trade Unions
Two and a half thousand waterside workers walked off the wharves in Melbourne in protest
The Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU) declared on 4 May 1965 that it was strongly opposed to the decision of the Federal Government to send a battalion of Australian troops which can be used as a combat force in South Vietnamese or anywhere else except in accordance with international obligations…
In May tugboats boycotted an American warship affecting its docking processes
Five hundred seamen, waterside workers and ship painters picketed the American embassy in Brisbane
Although opposed to the war the executive of the ACTU in May decided not to support industrial action against the war
Despite the protests, 1966 had continued high support for the government's policy on Vietnam
In the 1966 Federal election the government increased its vote
The Labor Party fought the election on the Vietnam War and suffered a crushing defeat
The electoral win for the Liberal Party was the biggest since Federation
Sir Robert Menzies, who had been Prime Minister for almost two decades retired from politics and was replaced by Harold Holt
In March 1966 Harold Holt announced that he was sending National Servicemen to Vietnam
Just two months later the first Australian conscript to be killed was Private Errol Noack form South Australia, who was shot dead by a sniper and had been in Vietnam for only ten days after that, and during the following three years, the anti-conscription movement became stronger with groups urging young men not to register and to resist the call up by going into hiding

I have refused to register for national service and shall continue to disobey further directions from the Department of Labour and National Service because I have a conscientious belief that the Vietnam war and conscription are wrong. Conscription is, I feel, unjustified in every case. The necessary measure of whether a war is worth fighting is whether people voluntarily enlist to fight it. The Vietnam War I see as the suppression of a powerful and enlightened force of a popular revolution. I could not escape a feeling of guilt and cowardice, if I complied with directions to further these evils…
Stephen Townsend, a conscientious objector

The practice of burning draft cards began at this time and continued until conscription was abolished in 1972
American Relations
In May 1966 PM Harold Holt visited America, as he believed like Menzies that Australia needed a strong relationship with the United States for security
He invited President Lyndon B. Johnson to visit Australia and pledged total support for the alliance between the two countries assuring the president of Australia's commitment
The phrase 'All the way with LBJ' attracted derision in Australia and confirmed in the minds of some that Australia had lost its independence to America
The phrase would reappear in the protests when LBJ visited Australia in October 1966 some of these demonstrations were violent, but for the most the president was warmly received by the Australian public
Community Opposition 1967
Artists and writers joined the protests and used their medium to support the anti-war movement
In Melbourne artists, writers and players' signed a 'Statement on Vietnam' which stated that they were appalled and angered by the conduct of our country in Vietnam

Linger not, stranger, shed no tear;
Go back to those who sent us here.
We are the young they drafted out
To wars their folly brought about.
Go tell those old men, safe in bed,
We took their orders and are dead.
A. D. Hope (quoted in Gregory Pemberton)
The Tet Offensive, February 1968

Throughout 1966, 1967 and into 1968 opinion polls indicated that the majority of the population continued to support involvement. It was not until October 1968 that the polls would show a change.
At this time Australia had eight thousand troops serving in South Vietnam.

The Tet Offensive has been seen by many as the turning point
The offensive was launched by North Vietnamese and the Vietcong on 44 South Vietnamese cities simultaneously
This act shocked the American (and Australian) public who had been consistently told that the Americans were winning the war
The Americans largest base at Khe Sanh was almost overrun by the North Vietnamese Army
This offensive led to President Johnson's decision to withdraw American troops the following year and not seek another term in office
Media Coverage
The reporting was largely uncensored and the public could witness the violence and brutality of the war in a way that hadn't been possible in other wars.

Each night Australians could switch on their television sets and watch the fighting of the day in Vietnam
War correspondents and photojournalists had enormous freedom in Vietnam
They could hitch rides on helicopters and travel with the soldiers into action
The Vietnam War has often been dubbed 'the television war' because of this public 'witnessing' through television. It made the war a daily event to be watched and commented on
Conscientious objectors or draft resisters used the media to publicise their beliefs
Objectors using the media, if arrested and sent to gaol, were in some cases brutally treated in military prisons
When this information became public it did not reassure parents whose sons might choose to become conscientious objectors
This contributed to ordinary people questioning the policy of conscription
Conscripts were coming home dead from 1966 onwards and the news of their deaths led to the ballot earning the name 'the lottery of death'
Draft Resisters
The Draft Resistance Movement was formed in February 1968 and comprised members of the Young Labor Association, University Labor Clubs, the Young Socialist League, and former members of the Youth Campaign Against Conscription
Gregory Pemberton argues this organisation was more militant than its predecessors, not only opposing conscription but also attempting to make the system unworkable
The first man sent to a civilian gaol for non-compliance with the National Service Act was John Zarb who spent over a year in Pentridge Prison (Melbourne)
When in August 1969 he was released, The Sydney Morning Herald ran an editorial in which it equated the courage of draft resisters with the action of a war hero in Vietnam
It was called 'Two Kinds of Courage'
For the first time in 1969 fifty five percent of people surveyed in a gallop poll were in favour of Australian troops being withdrawn and forty percent wanted the troops to remain
The Labor Party now felt confident enough to state in its federal election campaign that if elected they would bring Australian troops home by June 1970
The Liberal Party won the October election but with a greatly reduced majority
In late 1969 news broke of a massacre at My Lai where 18 months earlier around 120 defenceless villagers, Vietnamese women and children were killed by a United States Marine company
This massacre had been secretly photographed by an army photographer
Some Australians began to question who were the 'oppressors' of the war due not only to the massacre at May Lai but:
The saturation of bombing in North Vietnam,
The use of napalm on South Vietnamese villages suspected of supporting the North
Forced relocation of civilians and the destruction of ancestral homes
By 1970 the anti-war movement had grown into a mass movement comprising a broad cross-section of the community, in particular a section of the middle class
The Moratorium
A day on which there was expected to be 'an end to business as usual' and a concentration on the horrors of war
In Sydney there was a sight that many of those who were present at it expected to remember for the rest of their lives – a peaceful crowd of 20 000 to 25 000 sitting down in front of Sydney Town Hall, calmly expressing their opposition to the Government. In Melbourne there were scenes far beyond any radical hopes – a crowd of somewhere between 80 000 and 100 000 sitting in the street and chanting 'We want peace'.
Donald Horne, Time of Hope – Australia 1966 - 1972
The campaign brought together a broad group of interests including the left-wing of the ALP, established peace and anti-corruption groups, unions, church groups, the Save Our Sons, the New Left and some members of the Communist Party it also included veterans of previous wars and may middle class people who were not part of any group but strongly opposed to conscription and the war in Vietnam
It was a cross-section of Australian society
Chairman of the Vietnam Moratorium Committee was Dr. Jim Cairns

The minister for Labour and National Service said 'it is an invitation to anarchy'. Later he called supporters of the Moratorium 'political pack raping bikies'. The Prime Minister said they were 'storm troopers'. The Melbourne Herald said 'Dr. Cairns is on a perilous path.' The Melbourne Age said it was 'a dangerous protest' and decided that 'to believe that the street demonstrations will be non-violent seems naïve to the extreme'.
J.F. Cairns, Silence Kills, 1970

In the editorials there was a new attitude to the war, a grudging acknowledgement of the doubts about its legitimacy

Many Australians share the abhorrence Dr. Cairns and his group feel for the Vietnam war and resent the conscription required to fill the Australian ranks in a doubtful cause
The Herald, 26 May (1970?)

(Media refers to) the growing futility of the slaughter in Vietnam, and its divisive effects on our own community
The Herald, 31 March (1970?)

The government was clearly worried by the strength of the Moratorium campaign, having lost as never before, the moral ascendancy in the debate.
Gregory Pemberton, Vietnam Remembered

The first and largest of the moratorium marches took place on 8 May 1970
At 3.15pm all the demonstrators sat down in the street
In Melbourne at least 70, 000 protestors participated filling all of the central streets of the city there were 25, 000 in Sydney, 8, 000 in Brisbane, 6, 000 in Adelaide, 3, 000 in Perth and 3, 000 in Hobart
A second moratorium was held in September 1970 but was not as successful
In Sydney permission to march through the streets was refused and there was a huge police turnout
There were violent clashes and 200 demonstrators were arrested
The anti-war movement was no longer a minority group

The Vietnam Moratorium campaign was a public expression of the deepening division in Australian society caused by Australia's participation in the Vietnam War.
Change in Sentiment
In October President Nixon announced the withdrawal of another forty thousand troops
By late 1969 public sentiment had changed as evidenced by the strength of the moratorium campaign
In 1965, fifty six percent of people said that they wanted the troops to continue occupation of Vietnam, rising in 1966 to sixty one percent and again in 1967 to sixty two percent
Approximately two-thirds of the community approved of Australia's involvement in Vietnam
By 1970, those who wanted the troops to stay in Vietnam dropped between forty two percent and forty three percent
Those who wanted the troops to come home almost doubled, having risen to fifty percent
In 1965 the majority of the Australian population supported the nation's entry into the Vietnam war, but by 1970 the majority wanted their troops home
It was not really until 1968 that the strength of the anti-war movement had increased and more people were questioning Australia's role in Vietnam
Events in Vietnam and activities at home between these two dates changed many Australian' attitudes to the war and to selective compulsory conscription
Change in position were caused by: publicity by anti-war activists through protests, debates, letter writing, petitions and the moratoriums deaths of Australian soldiers, both regular and conscript the Tet Offensive and subsequent US withdrawal of troops stronger tactics from draft resisters media coverage of the violence and atrocities in Vietnam, in particular the My Lai massacre broader base of the movement artists and writers the middle class older people religious groups international pressures
It was not until the end of the 1960s, when it became clear that the war could not be won, that public support began to erode sharply.
Michael Sexton, War for the Asking
Long-Term Effects
The initial commitment of 4500 Australian troops had increased to a peak of 8, 000 troops. In April 1970 the Gorton government indicated that it would begin to withdraw Australian troops from Vietnam. When the ALP won the 1972 federal election and Gough Whitlam became Prime Minister he abolished Nation Service (conscription) and brought the remaining troops home from Vietnam. In March 1975 the North Vietnamese attacked South Vietnam and in April Saigon (now Ho Chi Minh), the South Vietnamese Capital, surrendered.
John Elliott (then president of the Liberal Party) expressed a view in 1988 that the party had lost 'a whole generation of voters aged between thirty and forty five, because their political attitudes had been formed during the Vietnam War years'.
Michael Sexton, War for the Asking

The negative reception the soldiers received on their return has left an enduring bitterness combined with chronic health problems both mental and physical in nature. Many families are missing sons, brothers, uncles and fathers that they never knew.

Timeline
1962 First advisors sent to Vietnam to train Vietnamese soldiers
1964 National Defence Act amended to introduce selective compulsory military service
1965 April – Government announces decision to send an Australian infantry battalion to Vietnam
Australian Labor Party criticises Menzies' decision
Save Our Sons formed
Youth Campaign Against Conscription (YCAC) formed
1966 Robert Menzies retires from politics. Harold Holt becomes PM and sends conscripts to Vietnam
October – Visit by LBJ, who was received with 'enthusiasm'
1967 Gough Whitlam replaces Arthur Calwell as leader of ALP
1968 February – the draft resistance is formed
Gorton becomes PM after Harold Holt drowns
My Lai massacre
Tet offensive in Vietnam
1969 My Lai massacre becomes public
Committee in Defiance of National Service Act
1970 US begins to withdraw troops
May – first Vietnam moratorium rally
September – second moratorium rally
1971 Australia begins withdrawing troops, but conscription remains
1972 ALP wins election and ends al military aid to South Vietnam
The National Service Act is abolished
1973 Last US soldiers withdrawn from Vietnam
Remaining Australian troops withdrawn from Vietnam
1975 Saigon surrenders

Debating Australia's Future
1960 – 2000: Vietnam
(Jo Leech)
Attitudes of Australian Society to Involvement in the Vietnam War criticism was of the nature of the use of conscripted troops
The change in attitudes was influenced by the combined efforts over time of those anti-war groups active as early as 1965 and changes in foreign policy directions
As early as 5 April 1962 Eddie Ward, a left-wing Australian Labor Party Federal Member of Parliament mooted potential conflict and greater international concern relating to Vietnam
The introduction of conscription by the Menzies government was widely viewed as the consequence of three related, yet distinct concerns
Australia's relationship with Indochina the expansion and improvement of Australian Defence
Communism
The ALP immediately opposed conscription calling it the 'lottery of death'
The ALP did not present a united view – this disparate stance led to their continual lack of cohesion and subsequent support
This lack of 'focus' would last until the 1969 general election
Menzies consequently received no substantial parliamentary opposition to his decision
He was also supported by the general media
The only alternative voice was The Nation
Between 1966 and 1969 polls showed that conscription was popular with almost 70 percent of respondents an opinion poll in August 1969 showed that 55 percent of people were in favour of withdrawing troops

Barry York maintains that anti-war movement included many diverse elements, form middle-class mums to trade unionists, but was given cultural shape by the participation of the so-called 'baby-boomers', those born after the Second World War, who were in their teens by the mid-1960s.

The Youth Campaign Against Conscription (YCAC) was established in 1964
Protests followed the first ballot on 10 March 1965
The decision to send troops on 29 April 1965 led to larger, more diverse protests
The momentum of the peace movement slowed down following the ALP defeat in the 1966 election
There was a new edge of violence developing in demonstrations
In 1966, opinion polls showed that 61 percent of Australians agreed with being in Vietnam, an increase of 5 percent from the previous year
In June 1966 half a million people turned out to welcome home the First Battalion
Elements of the ALP 'felt Tet vindicated its view that the Vietnam War was unwinnable as well as immoral, while the right was convinced the party's policy of withdrawal was now in the interests of the Americans themselves'

Confidence in American power has been shaken, since [the offensive] proved that it could not even protect its own embassy in Saigon. Confidence in American tactics and strategy has been undermined by evidence that it is ineffectual in practice and mistaken in theory. As for the new Thieu-Ky Government, its administrative façade has been exposed as paper-thin.
The Age (editorial) - What Went Wrong?

Calwell called Ky 'a little Asian Butcher' and 'a little quisling gangster'
Max Teichmann commented that Ky's visit to Australia was '…forcing people out onto the streets to demonstrate;… forcing our domestic police force to take on a role of a semi-political force…
By 1968 there had been a shift from the politics of conscience to those of non-compliance. – John Murphy
In April 1970 Jim Cairns spoke in Parliament defending the aims of the first march and suggesting that the citizens of Australia had a right to occupy the streets for political purposes:

Some… think that democracy is just Parliament… But times are changing. A whole generation is not prepared to accept this complacent, conservative theory. Parliament is not a democracy. It is one of the manifestations of democracy… Democracy is government by the people, and government by the people demands action by the people. It demands effective ways of showing what the interests and needs of the people really are. It demands action in public places all around the land…
Jim Cairns, April 1970

The Moratorium established a cooperative convergence between 'the left of the ALP, the range of established peace and anti-conscription groups, some Old Left unions, some church groups, the New Left, a still small women's movement and a revitalised Communist Party of Australia'
The (Moratorium) campaign gave the various groups a united "voice"
In April 1970 the Gorton government had, following American leads in 1969, begun to scale back commitments.
The next year his successor, William McMahon, had announced that all Australian troops would be withdrawn by the end of 1971
By September 1971 the peace movement had lost momentum
Conscription was somewhat less contentious given that the period of service had been reduced to 18 months and conscripts could no longer be sent to Vietnam
Ultimately, it was fear of the unknown in Communist China and the fall-out from the Cold War which made the Australian government follow America's lead by committing troops to Vietnam
As the 1960s progressed, Australians became better informed by the realities of war, through the testimonies of returned soldiers, media commentary and images of carnage on television
Although the Moratorium and other protest movements did not prompt the change in government policy they vividly demonstrated that a significant proportion of Australian society did not support the war, they way it was fought or the nature of Australia's commitment

It would not be in the Australian character or consistent with our national self-respect to stand aside while the Americans do the fighting in what we know and our own interests and our causes
Hasluck,
Minister for External Affairs
Primary Source Documents
Range of attitudes in 1965

Call up of 20-year olds opens January 25
Registration for Army
Canberra – The first registrations of 20-year olds under the new national service scheme will begin on January 25.
The registration will continue for two weeks – until February 8.
Those required to register are British subjects, both natural born or naturalised, who ordinarily reside in Australia and who turn 20 years of age between 1 January and June 30 this year.
The Age, 14 January 1965

...Conscription has many disadvantages, among which the effects of the national economy, individual employers and personal careers and lives are prominent. If, in addition its conditions arouse some ill-feeling against migrants of discourage some settlers from applying for citizenship, these are similarly part of the price the nation has to pay for ever-riding the necessity to defend itself and to protect its vital interests abroad.
The Age (editorial), 21 January 1965

…Already his Holiness the Pope, the Secretary – General of the United Nations (U Thant) and the Government of Canada, India and France have urged through both private and formal diplomatic channels their earnest desire for the negotiations leading to peace…
Anglican Bishops' letter to Sir Robert Menzies, The Age, 15 March 1965

I subscribe to the domino theory…. because I believe it obvious… that if the Vietnam War ends with some compromise that denies South Vietnam a real and protected independence, Laos and Cambodia, Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore and Indonesia will be vulnerable… This domino theory… has formidable realities to Australians who see the boundaries of aggressive communism coming closer and closer.
Sir Robert Menzies, 21 April 1965
…the war against Communist aggression in Vietnam is in a very real and direct sense Australia's war… It cannot be too often or too strongly emphasized that if South Vietnam is allowed to fall to Communism, then the extension of Communist influence down through the Malay Peninsula to the shores of Australia is inevitable.
…the dispatch of an Australian infantry battalion has greater importance than the numbers actually involved would suggest…
Sydney Morning Herald (editorial), 30 April 1965
The Federal government has made a grave decision in committing 800 Australian troops to fight in South Vietnam. Yet, however much Australians might abhor the prospect of becoming physically embroiled in the conflict in Vietnam, the government could not shirk its responsibilities there. The decision gives expression to the fundamentals of our policy in South East Asia. For the United States, the task of halting Communist aggression involves mainly the principles of freedom and peace. For Australians, in Borneo and Vietnam, our own security is also at stake, both now and in the future. The United States wants to negotiate settlement in Vietnam. Its stepped-up campaign is designed only to convince the Communists that they cannot take what they want by force. If the Americans lose militarily or diplomatically, so do we.
The West Australian, 1 May 1965

This is a grim week-end for every Australian. We are now at war, a war which will touch every one of us far more than most people, even today, will realize. Australia is to fight on the Asian mainland to aid the United States in stopping the advance of Communism, which threatens us directly. We are going with a token, but nonetheless committed and lethal force to support the South Vietnamese government against the aggression of North Vietnam, backed by communist China. Our Government has made the decision in our name, and that is its duty. The nation now has to support that… For us, the cost will not be light. Brave men will die in jungles without even seeing the other side's soldiers; many others will be wounded. At home we will have to commit a great deal of our manpower and our economy to the fight. The easy days ended with the Prime Minister's announcement on Thursday.
The Courier Mail, 1 May 1965

Letters to the Editor, May 1965
I am proud to realise the necessity for the sending of Australian troops to a country which is urgently requesting help to continue its fight against the imposition of government by a terrorist oligarchy.
Robert J Tyson, Burton Hall (ANU), Canberra ACT
The Australian, 6 May 1965

...The struggle in Vietnam cannot be resolved by military measures; only a negotiated settlement can bring an end to the insensate slaughter of many innocent people.
John J Dedman, Yarralumla ACT
The Australian, 6 May 1965

The Active intervention of the United States in South Vietnam has revealed her courageous determination to prevent the complete domination of South-East Asia by communist China.
John Warry, Caulfield VIC
The Australian, 25 May 1965

Range of Attitudes between 1965 and 1970

According to Murray Goot and Rodney Tiffen, polls 'often boosted the appearance of support for intervention, and undercut any sense of public opinion'
The majority continued to support the policy of conscription, but a consistent majority opposed the deployment of conscript troops outside Australia
Table of Australian Government Withdrawal of Troops from Vietnam
18 August 1971 The Prime Minister announces the bulk of Australian forces in South Vietnam are to be withdrawn, leaving only a modified training team.
The period of national service is reduced from two years to 18 months
5 March 1972 The last Australian logistic units leave Vung Tau and Australia's commitment in South Vietnam returns to a training role with the 150-man Australian Assistance Group, Vietnam (AAAGV) and the AATTV
2 December 1972 Australian Labor Party elected to government
5 December 1972 Conscription ends, draft resisters are released from jail and pending prosecutions for draft resistance are dropped
8 December 1972 Australia's military commitment in South Vietnam ends, although controversy about the precise end date of the war continues

Today's senior school students are not little children to be protected from public controversies. They are nearing the age when they can be conscripted, and will soon have to vote. They are required to read widely, exercise judgement and think clearly about foreign matters.
Vietnam Moratorium, Campaign Prospectus, May 1970

The demonstration was a forceful reply to those M.Ps who described intending marchers as 'bikies who are pack raping democracy'. The marchers showed their concern was human agony. Whether we believe their tactics effective, useful or even sensible, they renewed democracy, rather than raped it… Yesterday's march cannot be written off by the Government as the antics of communist influenced fools. It was a legitimate expression of opinion by a substantial section of the population.
The Age, 9 May 1970
The Moratorium
The purpose of the moratorium was rather to have gathering that go beyond that right and infringe the rights of others, to sit down in the street, to bring to bear a wish to break the law because they dislike something the Government has done after being elected by a majority.
Sydney Morning Herald, 6 May 1970

The motion also said the moratorium would give moral support to the Vietnamese to persist in their aggression and subversion in South Vietnam, cause unwarranted inconvenience to Australian citizens by the call to strike; and promote civil disorder and encourage breaking the law.
Sydney Morning Herald, 7 May 1970

Vietnam Moratorium an overwhelming success –
Tens of thousands of demonstrators participated in the Australia-wide Vietnam Moratorium. The number far exceeded anticipation.
For many weeks local groups, universities, offices, factories and businesses planned this all-important event. The Save Our Sons Movement took a very active part, including the publishing and distributing of 50, 000 leaflets, 'Mothers in Mourning'.
By the campaign's publicity every Australian in some way, was made to think. From the parliamentarian to the man in the street, people asked, 'What is the Moratorium?'
S.O.S. Newsletter, May 1970
Discussion in the Australian Financial Review
Conscription is an inefficient, inequitable and expensive means of fleshing out an army… An all-volunteers army is cheaper for three reasons.
The first reason follows from the fact that conscripts stay in the army a shorter time than volunteers…
…a smaller force is needed, and the army can use less man power. It is cheaper…
The government argues (rather smugly) that it is impossible to get enough volunteers because there is too much employment and too much prosperity.
John Edwards, 7 April 1970

The case for an all-volunteer army is clearly and persuasively put on these pages by John Edwards.
However, in the context of Australia's present political and geographical environment there is a strong case to be put forward not merely for the retention of National Service, but even for its improvement and expansion…
Conscription involves both the consciousness and conscience of society in matters of defence. People who wouldn't particularly care what use was made of a highly paid all-volunteers military force become much more deeply involved when the disposition of conscripted 18-year-olds is at stake.
A national government has to think with extra care about how it commits a conscripted force and to what national purpose…
Editorial, 7 April 1970
Jim Cairns Reflections on the Moratorium
I'd been working on my own for several years about Vietnam… [the CICD] were the source and foundation of the Vietnam Moratorium movement. The Vietnam Moratorium movement was a Melbourne movement… The result was that when we got our street marches in Melbourne they were two or three times a big as anywhere else.

...political parties are not groups of people interested in policy. They are groups of people interested in holding branch meetings, the form of which is always the same: Read the minutes, move a motion for their adoption, debate whether they should be adopted, receive the correspondence, write the letters, and sometimes someone has a word or two to say, but not often. These make up the branch, where the branch meeting consists very much of the same thing. Only occasionally do they get hot under the collar over some issue, some policy, but not very often. They're all used mainly to decide who should be the member of parliament for the area in which they exist, and they're made of the contest between those who are trying to be so. That's the summary of what political parties are like. You can't really say they're significant areas for the discussion of ideals, the discussion of principles, or the discussion of policy.

...demonstration, what we can call demonstration: picketing, marching in the street, confronting the police, that was part of Australia… It had been no more or less violent than it was up 1969 or '70, when the Vietnam Moratorium occurred… the papers were full of terrible predictions about what was going to happen… Archbishops were weeping tears of blood about the terrible things that were going to happen and I was identified with most of it in the week before the 8 May 1970.

…My argument briefly was: we were a peace movement and we were going to behave in a peaceful way. We were not a peace movement going to be aggressive.

The point I'm making is that I didn't make that a peace day, it was a peace day because of its nature, because of its content, because of the way people felt. They were going to behave unaggressively because they were committed to unaggressive behaviour. I didn't make it peaceful. It was peaceful because it was peaceful itself. And so it was peaceful.

Bourke Street didn't have a motor care or a tram in it. The police had moved them all out and had opened the city, and had cleaned the city out, for us to sue, wherever we wanted to go. We couldn't break the law because they'd taken the law away! Well that was the character of that movement.

There had been information passed on to use that someone was going to shoot from up on the tops of the buildings and so on. They wanted me to wear a metal waistcoat. Some people did… There were two men who never moved away from me all that time… They were looking up all the time. Had anyone tried to attack me they would have been in front of me. Had they heard any shot they'd have tried to put themselves between me and where it came from.
Interviews with Veterans
Vietnam Fragments: An Oral History of Australians at War, 
G McKay of the 58, 000 Australian soldiers who fought, 504 were MIA, 494 died and 2, 398 were injured
Soldiers may have had a duty of either 1 or 2 years
Soldiers returned to Australia often at night, and were asked to take off their uniform and arrive in civilian clothes

It wasn't anywhere near as traumatic as people make out. Most people who went wanted to go, they enjoyed it and I think they had a pretty good time. That side of the equation hasn't ever really been told.
Ian Ferguson
Troop Commander (3rd Calvary Regiment, Phuoc Tuy Province)

…society doesn't always recongnise the sacrifices that are being made by such a small part of the community on their behalf… it is really one of the essences of democracy that people can get up, whether we are at are or not, and express a view on whether we should or should not be there… if media portrayal of the horror of war can prevent or reduce it then good – but soldiers doing their countries' will should never be denigrated.
David Kibbey
Infantry Platoon Commander (7 RAR)

In a democracy I believe we do what we are told by the government. By that I mean that the military do not try and influence government policy. I believe the idea of going to Vietnam was right…
Al Pinches
Canberra Bomber Navigator, Phan Rang

I thought the anti-Vietnam protestors were a bit of a pain in the arse. While I accepted their right to protest, and I remember this quite clearly, I objected to them attacking soldiers as targets in their marches through cities. I detested their inability to distinguish between governments who were involved in the political fracas and soldiers who were just doing what they were told to do. Quite often these soldiers were members of their own class in society; the nashos came from all works of life.

…I think my greatest weakness before going to Vietnam was the fact that I didn't think enough about the big picture and where I was heading, what the Army was doing and what was morally right, what was politically right.
Dan McDaniel
Platoon Commander (4 RAR South Vietnam)

In hindsight, Australian involvement may have been a mistake, but at the time it was a valid decision of the Australian Government.
Les Hayward
Qantas B707 Officer (Sydney – Saigon)

Australia's involvement in Vietnam was not worth it because we didn't get the result we wanted, and we lost over 500 soldiers. Many people do not understand how multi-faceted the US and Vietnamese programs were in Vietnam.
Ernie Chamberlain
Intelligence Officer (South Vietnam)
Prime Ministers of Australia 1962 – 1975
Time in Office Name Political Party
1949 – 1966 Robert Gordon Menzies Liberal
1966 – 1967 Harold Edward Holt Liberal
1967 – 1968 John McEwen Country Party
1968 – 1971 John Grey Gorton Liberal
1971 – 1972 William McMahon Liberal
1972 – 1975 Gough Whitlam ALP (Labor)
Timeline of Formation of Protest Groups
Date Established Name Common Acronym
Early 1960s Peace Quest Forum
(Melbourne)
1964 Eureka Youth League – youth movement of the Communist Party of Australia
November 1964 Youth Campaign Against Conscription YCAC
May 1965 Save Our Sons SOS
1965 Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament CND
August 1965 Vietnam Action Campaign VAC
September 1965 Vietnam Day Committee VDC
1967 The Pacifist Society at the University of Melbourne

The Labour Club Students Democratic Alliance (in Queensland) SDA
1968 Conscientious Objectors (Non-pacifist)
- Melbourne CO
Late 1968 Committee against the National Service Act CANSA
July 1969 Committee in Defiance of National Service – hand over 8000 signed members by November
End 1960s New Left – new radicals, student revolutionary left

For Australia's Sake: Vietnam
Australia's involvement in the war began accompanied by mild public concern by the time the decision was made to withdraw Australian forces from Vietnam the whole country was involved in a bitter and angry debate about troops being there this created the greatest degree of soul-searching the nature of the war and the public's perception of its morality gave rise to such passions the further the war went, the more it was seen as an unfair struggle between a David (the North Vietnamese) and a Goliath (the Allies)
More bombs were dropped on the North Vietnamese than were dropped in the whole of the Second World War
The horror of the war was shown through the media for the first time, and the scale of this horror seemed greater than politicians could justify
When American and Australian troops were finally withdrawn, neither nation mourned greatly (over what seemed to be an inglorious defeat)
The origins of the war
Vietnam was originally occupied by the Chinese for about a thousand years until 939 AD, but the Vietnamese won their freedom
The French began to colonise Vietnam in the 1840s and effectively took control after an Da Nang in 1858
The Vietnamese resisted frequently, but the resistance was always put down un til in the 1930s a communist wing of the nationalist movement developed and largely took control
In 1940 Vietnam fell to the Japanese, but the communists gained further popularity by leading the resistance
When the Second World War was over, the French, encouraged by the Americans, were able to return
American aid began to flow in to help the French oppose the Viet Minh, as the communists and their allies who were opposing the French were called
The Viet Minh turned revolution into a war
In 1954, at Dien Bien Phu, the French suffered a defeat
A subsequent conference in Geneva decided Vietnam would be divided into two parts, at the 17th parallel
The (victorious) Viet Minh, led by Ho Chi Minh, would govern the North
The anti-communists, led by Ngo Dinh Diem, would govern the South
The Viet Minh had many supporters in the South
What was to become 'The Vietnam War' began when Diem set out to crush opponents to his regime
The response from the north was to send troops across the border
Diem found it increasingly difficult to maintain control and turned to the US for military aid
By 1962 military "advisers" were helping the Army of the Republic of Vietnam (ARVN)
The Vietnam War was ultimately about communism and the fears among the western powers that it would spread through Asia
Australia felt if communism could be stopped in Vietnam, then the rest of Asia would be more secure from its 'threat'
The Diem regime proved to be extremely weak it was divided and tended to rest more on the whims of Diem himself
In 1963 Diem was assassinated by his anti-communist rivals
As South Vietnam was plunged into turmoil American military encouragement was increased
Australia also decided to join the conflict
Australian Troops join the War
The decision to send Australian combat troops to Vietnam was made by the Australian government late in 1964, through Australian activity in Vietnam had actually commenced two years earlier with the dispatch of 30 instructors to help train the Army of the Republic of Vietnam
The Australian Labor Party was opposed to intervention but the public reaction at the time favoured the government
Few Australians in fact knew precisely what the war was about, but their deep-seated fears of the new 'Yellow Peril' and the 'Communist Menace' had a good deal to do with their support of Australian involvement
To the Liberal government the decision to send troops to Vietnam was a realistic assessment of Australia's dependence on the USA
Australian diplomacy, recognising the weakness of the British and French, had pressed the US for involvement
In 1954 Australia had joined the South-East Asian Treaty Organization (SEATO)
Holt's declaration was an indication of his attitude to the United States and his belief that the USA could offer Australia security from communism
The Viet Cong/National Liberation Front unlike previous wars in the nature of the enemy after 1954 the major units of the Viet Minh army in the south of Vietnam had been disbanded or returned to the north small groups of communists had been left behind in 1957 these groups began expanding and emerged as the Viet Cong, or National Liberation Front (NLF) by 1949 local companies were being formed, by 1961 battalions, by 196 regiments and in 1965 divisional staffs were formed to coordinate the regiments
The Americans were able to hold the cities and ports, the Viet Cong ensured they would never completely control the countryside
Unlike previous wars Vietnam often had no fronts it proved to be extremely difficult to distinguish the enemy from the civilian population
The Viet Cong were essentially divided into three groups:
The core were regular soldiers situated everywhere the provincial mobile units were usually recruited from the village guerrilla units in which they served these were full time soldiers with knowledge of the area and close contact with the locals
The village guerrillas were part time, lightly-equipped and not well trained
The Communist Party organization controlled and coordinated all activity at each level
The struggle in Vietnam was not only for military superiority but for people's minds
Soldiers would increasingly find themselves carrying out 'civilian' tasks so as to bring the Vietnamese people onto their side
From 1964 the North Vietnamese began to introduce their own regular armed forces (the NVA) into the conflict
They were supplied by the Soviet Union and China
Attitudes towards the enemy
The American forces gave the Viet Cong the nickname of 'gook'
It was a racist commentary on an enemy for whom (on the whole) they felt the utmost distaste
American forces in the later years of the war faced numerous allegations of atrocity, including the My Lai massacre in which innocent civilians were shot dead
Occasional allegations of atrocity were also levelled at the Australians and one of these was confirmed
It is clear that the Australian soldiers came to share their American comrades' contempt for the enemy who they referred to as 'slopes' many soldiers shared the belief that the enemy was sub-human, with different values from their own and that therefore he could be treated with distain
There was nothing unique about this: it is a common experience of war, a way of making the enemy appear so much beneath common humanity to justify his death
The Viet Cong pictured the Australians similarly
There was brutality on both sides
It was another example of the misunderstanding which botch causes and is caused by war
The Terrain
The allies could generally out-gun their enemy, and had some of the most advanced military equipment the world had seen to date
The Viet Cong and North Vietnamese Army had the advantage of being used to the climate and knowledge of the local terrain
The tropical humidity of Vietnam along with the thick jungles and mangroves made it difficult for the Allied soldiers to adjust, while the Viet Cong were fighting on their own ground ideal ground for guerrilla warfare
The geography of the South Vietnam helped determine the nature of the fighting
The Australian army advisers
In 1961 the strength of the Australian armed forces had been scaled down from a Korean War peak of 57, 243 to 46, 774
Many of the military were still employed in Malaya and with tensions growing between Malaya and Indonesia there were few to spare for Vietnam
Few soldiers had a more difficult task than the advisers who not only had to instruct and help organize the South Vietnamese army but carry out difficult missions
They also had to overcome considerable social barriers
Australians in Vietnam 1965
There was never any shortage of soldiers wanting to go to Vietnam
The war offered excitement, interest and monetary incentives in the form of war-service housing loans, tax free allowances and duty-free goods
The careful soldier could save most of his pay and prepare for the future
Few of the first arrivals could imagine what was to come
The 1st Battalion sailed out to public applause on 27 May 1965 and arrived in South Vietnam to a very cheerful reception from the Americans on the 14-18 June
The Bien Hoa base stood across the main route to Saigon and contributed to the security of the capital it was a vital stronghold and the Viet Cong were as aware of this as the Americans (and Allies)
In June the Viet Cong embarked upon an all-out offensive to capture South Vietnam
The Australians soon realised the best means of defence was attack
(a strategy they had used in previous wars)
On 14 June the first patrol set out from the base
Late in June a 'search and destroy' mission was launched to "mop-up" Viet Cong bases in the outlying districts
The objective was to "flush-out" the enemy from their positions in the Jungle
The advance was preceded by a heavy American bombing raid
When the Australian troops arrived the Viet Cong had gone
The Australians had learned a great deal about jungle warfare in previous wars
The Americans believed in massive air and artillery strikes and well-armed attacks by close-knit groups, whereas the Australians favoured attack by stealth
Australians proved their theory had a considerable degree of merit
Whenever an Australian soldier was encountered by the enemy his companions would close in rapidly and attack from all sides, thus reducing the danger to themselves, whilst taking the enemy by surprise such tactics worked well on numerous occasions
The Australians were once again showing themselves masters of jungle warfare
The Viet Cong were hard to find and moved with great speed – Skirmishes tended to be brief
The enemy was all around – In these circumstances it was one of the many tragedies of the war that civilians sometimes were shot by mistake
The war intensifies
January – May 1966
During 1966 the war became more intense
Both sides expanded their participation with neither seeming certain of victory
On 30 May 1966 the 1st Battalion held its final ceremonial parade before returning to Australia
24 men had been killed
Phuoc Tuy Province:
The First Australian Task Force
The Australians found a means of participating in the war with greater freedom from American control and also began to introduce conscripts into the services
The national service scheme was seen then as the only answer to the increasing demand for troops and met little immediate opposition
The new Australian force was a 'miniature' army
The new force was named the 1st Australian Task Force (1 ATF) and became 'a short back and sides efficient fighting machine'
The Viet Cong had been active in Phuoc Tuy since 1945 and had built up a large network of political and military organisations
The Task Force was given the task of seeking out and destroying the enemy, so that the civilians could then be protected and helped
At times the soldiers were unclear as to what was their major task
It also turned out that the Task Force was not as large or well-armed as was originally thought and lack of men and weapons made it hard for it to fulfil all of its objectives
National Servicemen
About half the casualties of the war were national servicemen
The first NS intake was mid-1965 nicknamed "nasho"
It came as something of a shock to a nation which considered itself fit and healthy that a high proportion, around 44 per cent, failed to meet the physical, educational and psychological standards of the army
The typical national service recruit became a private
He spent ten weeks learning drill, basic fieldcraft and the discipline of an army life
He was then allocated to a corps where he received a further two to three months specialist training before being posted to a unit
Those selected for officer training were sent from the recruitment training battalions (RTBs) to do six months at Officer Training School
Of these only 50 per cent graduated as second lieutenants recruits with professional, medical or dental qualifications were commissioned to the rank of captain, following only six weeks of basic training
About a quarter of the recruits went into the infantry
National Servicemen soon constituted about 40 percent of the army
The army did not distinguish between professionals and national servicemen though it was clear to most soldiers which were which
In Vietnam most Australian soldiers expressed hostility towards the Americans
As the war dragged on their greater resentment was reserved for the 'war resisters' at home
The more popular the anti-war movement became the more perplexed were the national servicemen in Vietnam
They, along with all soldiers had either seen or been apart of some terrible events and felt they had a lot to put up with
The national servicemen felt themselves to be the unfortunate victims of circumstances beyond their control

As a result of the anti-war feelings at home many troops, regulars and national servicemen, eventually returned to Australia deeply embittered. They alone of the soldiers in Australia's nine wars came home without a heroes' welcome.
Page 58
The Ambush at Long Tan
On 17 August the Viet Cong laid a trap in the Phuoc Tuy area
Two (Australian) platoons advanced slowly into the plantation, in pouring tropical rain
The plantation suddenly erupted with mortar bombs and bullets
A number of soldiers were killed
Shortly after nightfall, a relieving force was carried to the enemy rear
The Viet Cong fled leaving behind 245 dead and numerous weapons
The Australians had 17 dead and 21 wounded
Search patrols 1966 – 67: relations with the Vietnamese
The success at Long Tan seemed to improve relations between the Australians and some of the Vietnamese locals
The town of Ba Ria erected a banner across the road which read "The people of Phuoc Tuy applaud the victory of the Royal Australian Forces and the destruction of the Viet Cong Regiment on August 18th 1966"
The Australians became masters in the use of small patrols in 'cordon and search' operations
Suspected Viet Cong were rounded up and interrogated
Some villages were surprisingly cooperative (some were not)

Why, after six months of determined generosity and bloody hard work didn't we get any vegetables form Hoa Long? And why aren't the people there prepared to earn themselves a few piastres they could well use by doing your laundry? So far our civil aid activities seem to have achieved bugger all of lasting significance.

The duality of the Australians' experience made it difficult fomr them to be 'military' one minute and 'civilian' the next
In addition to these difficulties were the problems of the Viet Cong's entrenchment and the widespread corruption that existed in the government of South Vietnam
The Special Air Service
The SAS kept close liaison with the RAAF
Their operations were so successful they were copied by the Americans
By the end of 1966 it seemed that the Australians' efforts were paying off
Viet Cong sampans carrying ammunition and supplies were trapped and sunk before they could reach the troops
Towns and villages were being 'pacified'
The Viet Cong and NVA main units had been cleared from the central Phuoc Tuy area and the main route between Vung Tau and Saigon had been reopened
The Tet Offensive
During 1967 the war continued for a time substantially in the favour of the United States and its allies with large multi-divisional forces pressing the North Vietnamese out of previously-held areas
The US however was unaware that the North Vietnamese were preparing themselves for a major offensive in the Lunar New Year (Tet) The communist onslaught was fierce – the attack had been well prepared
The Australian Task Force had to fight hard to regain control of Ba Ria, which was temporarily overrun
It also repelled forces which pressed in on Bien Hoa and Long Binh and contributed towards a decisive defeat of the North Vietnamese
The Tet offensive though proved in the long run to be a turning point in favour of the Vietnamese communists
In March 1968 President Johnson announced he would not stand for re-election
The new President, Richard Nixon, found he could not alter public opinion as it became clear the war was being lost
The RAN and RAAF
RAAF units were gradually built up to a helicopter squadron (9 squadron), a Canberra bomber squadron (2 squadron) and a transport squadron (35 Squadron)
Helicopter pilots had to brave the enemy's fire in ferrying troops to battle positions and returning them to the safety of base camp or hospital
In 1967 the Australian government sent a destroyer to take part in the United States Seventh Fleet's coastal blockade against the North Vietnamese seaborne reinforcements of the anti-Saigon forces
The support of the RAAF and the RAN added to the ability of the Australian ground forces to keep the communists on the run
The war ends
By the early 1970s the Americans had come to accept that their military commitment to the Vietnam conflict should end
The pressures of the peace movement and the plain fact that the war could not be won gave President Nixon relatively little choice
Peace talks were opened in Paris
During 1972 American ground forces were gradually reduced to 50 000 men and finally confined to support and advisory roles
President Thieu was an authoritarian leader and the ruling elites of South Vietnam lacked unity
Thieu's regime was weak, whereas the communist's political structure had never crumbled
The communist take-over of South Vietnam was inevitable
The Australian Task Force withdrew from Vietnam late in 1971 in a "phased withdrawal"
The Viet Cong were still operating throughout Phuoc Tuy province, their political hold had not been broken and their deeply-entrenched local support had made the Task Force's effort extremely difficult
Though the Australian army had held together much better than the American, its undoubted proficiency and experience in jungle warfare were not sufficient to make its mission a success
A few Australian military advisers were left behind to help the South Vietnamese
They were withdrawn during 1972
On 27 December 1972 the newly-elected Australian Labor Government announced that all defence aid to South Vietnamese would cease
On 28 January 1973 a cease fire was signed by the United States, North Vietnam, South Vietnam and representatives of the Viet Cong in South Vietnam
The Communist forces proved too strong for the South Vietnamese and in 1975 a communist government was established in Saigon
The NFL flag was raised over the city
Casualties
Of the 50, 190 Australians who served in Vietnam 424 died and almost 3000 were wounded
Most casualties came about by small-arms fire or from mines exploding rather than as a result of artillery bombardment
Living conditions, by the standards of war, had also been good
Combat was of limited duration and there was plenty of rest and recuperation
Minor illnesses such as gostro-intestinal infections, skin diseases and malaria affected a large number of troops
Overall, however, the immediate and obvious effects of war were somewhat less than in previous conflicts there was little of the drug-taking that dogged the American army
The Home Front
In Vietnam (as in all previous wars) the Australians played a secondary role to a major ally
The Australian Government had pressed the Americans into the struggle
The Australian public had given its support initially to the use of Australian troops
Concern eventually turned into protest, but unlike the protest of the First World War, the hostility towards the war in Vietnam was not channelled into political circles but displayed in public protest in the streets
Conscription… created social divisions not seen since 1916-17
The chances of being called up if you were a 20 year-old Australian male were about one in ten
There was a class bias in the conscription; balloted student could have their call-up deferred until their studies had been completed but the less well-educated draftees, and there less socially advantaged had a much greater chance of being sent to Vietnam
Failure to register, the burning of a draft card and failure to attend a medical examination brought three weeks gaol
Failure to report to an army induction centre after a receipt of a call-up notice bought two years imprisonment
Many of the draftees genuinely believed the war to be wrong
Some damaged their bodies in order to fail medical tests
The anti-Vietnam war campaign
The conscription of troops for Vietnam was supported enthusiastically by the Returned Services League and various Liberal Party backbenchers and branches
Most Australians were surprised at the announcement (of conscription)
The Australian Labour Party also seemed to have been taken unawares and was slow to organize opposition
It was the public's increasing awareness of the realities of thr war that lifted the level of protest

We oppose overseas conscription because:
We believe that we may be sent to fight in Vietnam… This would be a moral wrong and an unjust call upon our lives by the Government of our country. We share a fundamental belief that… Australia's role in these perilous times is to seek an end to South-East Asian disputes, through negotiations for peaceful settlements – not to pursue the murderous path to world conflict.
Advertisement in The Australian
Youth Campaign Against Conscription
1965
When President Johnson toured Australia in support of the Liberals the protests became more strident and police reactions more violent
On 18 July 1965, Bill White, a Sydney school-teacher, became the first draftee to refuse a note requiring him to report for duty at an army induction centre
His stand served as an example to others
The ALP's defeat in the 1966 election had forced the protest movement further in this direction
An increasing number of 20-year-old Australians refused to comply with the ballot
Others refused to comply with the ballot
Others refused to attend medical examination
During 1968 the first of the protestors were imprisoned
The Draft Resistance Movement was a militant organisation established in Melbourne
It claimed that it had 'not been formed to oppose conscription, it had been formed to wreck it'
It did not last long, but influenced others
Many trade unions, academics and religious bodies now gave their support
Police arrests increased, under the Crimes Act and city by-laws
Public opinion polls in mid-1969 indicated a new and in some ways puzzling direction of opinion, with a majority opposing the war and a falling number, though still a majority, supporting conscription the 1969 election returned the Liberals to power
At a national meeting in Melbourne early in 1970 anti-war groups from around the country reached agreement on the concept of the moratorium
On 8 and 9 May 1970 over 200 000 people took part in moratoriums across the country
A second was held in October 1970 and a third in June 1971
In Melbourne, Jim Cairns led a march of around 100 000

I believed that the war was not justified as a defence of America or her allies, nor was it in the interest of the Vietnamese people whose interest… the American military intervention was impeding and suppressing.
Jim Cairns
The Government tried to take the heat out of the confrontation by delaying the prosecution of a number of resisters and by promising partial withdrawal of troops
Resisters were given shelter, government ministers were confronted by mail and at meetings
By this time public opinion had begun to turn decisively not only against the war but also conscription and well known politicians and church leaders came out against the draft
The war became the fundamental issue of the 1972 election campaign
Gough Whitlam made clear his opposition to conscription and when his government was elected conscription ceased
The groundswell of opposition was such that it became impossible for governments to ignore it
Civilian life resumes
The adjustment to civilian life posed similar difficulties to the Vietnamese veterans as it had to many of previous wars
This time the publics reaction was not the same
This time there was little of the enthusiasm that had heralded the ending of previous wars
Soldiers were flown in quietly, given civilian clothes and reparation benefits
Few were regarded as heroes
Some passed from war to civilian life in a matter of hours
There was much to be put out of their minds, but such was the national 'guilt' associated with the war that few people wanted to hear their experiences and help relieve the tensions
Some soldiers felt betrayed by the nation, others that they had betrayed themselves
The debate about the effects of the defoliant Agent Orange continues
Deformed babies were being born to families of Vietnam veterans
Only time will tell just what the true effects have been

Changing Perceptions
Australians objected to the Vietnam War for a wide variety of reasons. Some saw it as a strategic mistake; others rejected it on political grounds; others objected to the war as the last flicker of colonialism; others again saw it in quasi-Marxist terms as a classical conflict between advanced capitalism (represented by the USA) and an emergent socialist society. A number of Australians, however, rejected the war on specifically religious and moral grounds, seeing the allied conduct of the conflict as violating the conditions of a just war.
M. Charlesworth and V. Noone
War: Australia and Vietnam, 1987

Conscription caused litter response among the public possibly as it was before the announcement that Australian troops would serve in Vietnam
On 9 August 1964, though, the first anti-war demonstration was held during the Hiroshima Day Commemoration march
20 000 marchers carried banners that declared 'No War in Vietnam'
In Melbourne two hundred demonstrators protested outside the US Consulate
The first specifically anti-conscription meeting was held the day after the announcement on 11 November 1964
Save Our Sons was established in June 1965 by Joyce Golgerth and Pat Ashcroft in Sydney
Conscripts serving overseas were its concern in a Gallup Poll taken in 1965, 43 percent of those asked considered America as Australia's 'best friend', 39 per cent nominated Britain and only a small minority questioned the extent of our involvement and alignment with the USA
On 30 June 1965 when a demonstration was held at Sydney's Central Station as the first group of national service conscripts left for training at Puckapunyal

I am opposed to a State's right to conscript a person, I believe very strongly in democracy and democratic ideals – and I believe that it is in the area of the State's right over the life of the individual that the difference lies between totalitarian and democratic government. My opposition to conscription, of course, is intensified greatly when the conscription is for military purposes. In fact the National Service Act is the embodiment of what I consider to be morally wrong and, no matter what the consequences, I will never fulfil the terms of the Act.
YCAC Newsletter,
September 1966

In those years [1966-72] what 'made news'? Amongst other things, forms of protest – new forms (like bra burnings, freedom rides, talk-ins, sit-ins, vigils), or old forms of protest done up with new words ('demo'; 'women's lib'; 'green bans'). Police arrests made news.
D. Horne
Conscription denies the humanity and individuality of a human being. He becomes no more than the servant of the authority which conscripts. The authority of a government over an individual's life can, under no circumstances, be justified. It has no inherent divine right to conscript for military service, nor does democratic sanction legitimise such authority.
Peter Hornby, We Resist Because, 1970

Christian discipleship challenges me to resist an Act which crushes basic human rights and sends young men off to a war which world opinion condemns.
Robert Mowbray

Not with my life you don't napalm women and children in Vietnam, burn down their flimsy huts and villages, deprive them of their future by backing a corrupt military dictatorship

Not with my life do you kill a child's parents and offer him a bar of chocolate or maim him cruelly and offer him a new artificial limb.
Michael Hamel-Green

The DRM has not been formed to oppose conscription, it has been formed to wreck it. We are opposed to the war in Vietnam and we intend to resist the conscription of Australian youth for the war by all available means…
Peacemaker,
February-March 1968

The groups that followed the DRM were essentially the same in philosophy, were university based and, consequently, middle-class
The major groups were
Students for a Democratic Society (Sydney University and Tasmania
The Pacifist Society (Melbourne University)
Students for Democratic Action (Queensland University)
By the beginning of March 1968 over one hundred people had been arrested for handing out pamphlets in front of the Melbourne GPO
In June 1969, 500 academics signed statements of support for draft resisters
A Gallup Poll in August 1969 showed, for the first time, a majority of people who wished to see the end of Australian involvement in Vietnam

When you leave here today, realise a sacred trust. You have the trust to stand for peace and for the qualities of the human spirit to which we must dedicate ourselves… Our spirit is the spirit of peace and understanding. Our spirit is opposed to violence, opposed to hate, opposed to every motive that has produced this terrible war. And in developing our own spirit, we will change the spirit of other people. We can overcome, ladies and gentlemen, and I have never seen a more convincing sight than I can see now to give me confidence that we shall overcome.
Jim Cairns,
In his address to the Moratorium marchers
8 May 1970

There were no arrests during the moratorium
On 22 April 1970, two weeks prior to the moratorium, Prime Minister John Gorton announced that one of the Task Force's three battalions in South Vietnam would not be replaced when it finished its tour of duty

Draft resistance confronts the government in a way that legal methods of opposition do not. The person who deliberately and openly defies the law on conscription, presents the government with a dilemma. To prosecute him would draw attention to the opposition to conscription. To allow his challenge to go unanswered calls into question the very authority of the government and encourages others to refuse to be conscripted with impunity. Thus draft resisters have the government in clift stick. Even a small number can provide the catalyst for a massive movement against conscription. This is what is happening in Australia today. The number of draft resisters who have publicly declared themselves has risen from about 6 in 1967 to over 300 in 1971.
Downdraft – A Draft Resisters Manual
Melbourne Draft Resisters Union, 1971

There was support for draft resisters from people like the headmaster of (the prestigious) Newington College in Sydney
On 30 March 1971 Prime Minister William McMahon announced the further withdrawal of 1, 000 men from Vietnam and followed this by saying that most of Australia's combat forces would be withdrawn by the end of the year
In June the ALP announced that it would end national service and void any penal consequences
The Australian Labor Party, under the leadership of Gough Whitlam, won the federal election of 1972
The Liberal-Country Party coalition had governed Australia for twenty three years
The Government did maintain the Australian Embassy in Saigon, but it also established diplomatic links with North Vietnam in 1973 and established an aid programme before 1975

The Vietnam Lesson
Australia entered the Vietnam war: to support US policy in Vietnam, in order to have a strong ally in South-East Asia
The Australian fear of communism led to involvement for security reasons
The Australian involvement also rested on the assumption that Asian countries desired western democratic ideals
(ironic)
The consequences were the political motivation of the middle class in response to national service and a far more cynical attitude towards government, politicians and the decision-making process
Australia's military involvement and its domestic legacy, have been very influential in determining recent political attitudes towards the Indo-Chinese region
It was a war whose perceived character did not change until 1966 when it was seen as one in which the US sought to impose an unwanted, increasingly discredited regime upon a country of no great strategic importance to it. It ended as the last war of US television screens. 
In hindsight, the primary error over Vietnam was the failure of the US – as well as Australia and New Zealand – to comprehend that the North Vietnamese were not only communists but nationalists bent upon the reunification of the State.
For Australia and New Zealand, America's chief allies, there have also been lessons learned. Not only lessons, but a loss of innocence… Some 66 percent of those polled [In 1985] now believe Australia was wrong to have sent forces to Vietnam; in 1967, by contrast, some 62 percent believed it was right to be doing so.
Sydney Morning Herald, 30 April 1985
Problems with History (American Sources)
Heroes, John Pilger
(Jonathan Cape 1986, Vintage 2001)
This “historical amnesia” is not accidental; if anything it demonstrates the insidious power of the dominant propaganda of the Vietnam war. The constant American government line was that the war was essentially a conflict of Vietnamese against Vietnamese, in which Americans became 'involved', mistakenly and honourably. This assumption was shared both by “hawks” and “doves”; it permeated the media coverage during the war and has been the overriding theme of numerous retrospectives since the war. It is a false and frequently dishonest assumption. The longest war this century was a war waged by America against Vietnam, North and South. It was an attack on the people of Vietnam, communist and non-communist, by American forces. It was an invasion of their homeland and their lives, just as the current presence in Afghanistan of Soviet forces is an invasion. Neither began as a mistake.
Page 178
(Emphasis is original)

The accredited version of events has not changed. It is that non-communist South Vietnam was invaded by communist North Vietnam and that the United States came to the aid of the “democratic” regime in the South. This of course is untrue, as documentation I have touched upon makes clear. That Ho Chi Minh waited so long before sending a regular force to assist the American attacks seems, in retrospect, extraordinary; or perhaps it was a testament to the strength and morale of those South Vietnamese who had taken up arms in defence of their villages and their homeland. In 1965 the American counter-insurgency adviser, John Paul Vann, wrote in a memorandum addressed to his superiors in Washington that a “popular political base for Government of South Vietnam does not now exist” and the majority of the people in South Vietnam “primarily identified” with the National Liberation Front.
Page 189

During those years the United States dispatched its greatest ever land army to Vietnam, and dropped the greatest tonnage of bombs in the history of warfare, and pursued a military strategy deliberately designed to force millions of people to abandon their homes, and used chemicals in a manner which profoundly changed the environmental and genetic order, leaving a once bountiful land petrified. At least 1,300,000 people were killed and many more were maimed and otherwise ruined; 58,022 of these were Americans and the rest were Vietnamese. President Reagan has called this a “noble cause”.
Page 190

Images usurped the judgements of experienced reporters who affected the roles of innocent bystander and caption writer. Public attitudes follow from perspectives; by allowing the false “neutrality” of television images to dominate the coverage of war, journalists allowed misconceptions to become received truths. The first casualties were truth and context; bang-bang and contemporary history were deemed not to blend on the screen. That the Geneva peace conference in 1954 had been undermined by Washington, that communist China was no friend of communist Vietnam, that the NLF had sought the establishment of a non-communist, neutral coalition in South Vietnam — these truths went unremembered and unconnected.
Page 260
Rogue State, William Blum
(Common Courage Press, 2000)
Most people believe that the US lost the war. But by destroying Vietnam to its core, by poisoning the earth, the water and the gene pool for generations, Washington had in fact achieved its primary purpose: preventing what might have been the rise of a good development option for Asia.
Pages 87 - 88
Show us the Truth About Vietnam, Ignacio Ramonet
(Le Monde Diplomatique, April 2000)
The films shows young “veterans” (20-27) returning from the war. They realise they have been taking part in an act of butchery, and that they have been conditioned, dehumanised and turned into criminal “Terminators”. They also realise that there will never be an international criminal tribunal to look into the Vietnam war: the politicians and generals responsible for the massacres, the use of napalm, the bombing of civilians, the mass executions in prisons and the ecological disasters resulting from the use of chemical defoliants will never be tried for their crimes against humanity.

The First Casualty: The War Correspondent as Hero and Myth-Maker From the Crimea to Kosovo, Phillip Knightley 
(Prion Books, 2000),
At a time when the most damage of the was was being inflicted on Indo-China, the news coverage was at its worst, because editors and producers had decided that the ground war was virtually over and that, with the steady withdrawal of U.S. troops underway, public interest had declined. The second unfortunate result was that those editors and producers decided that there was no further interest in American atrocity stories.
Page 438

In Vietnam, racism became a patriotic virtue ... All Vietnamese became “dinks”, “slopes”, “slants”, or “gooks”, and the only good one was a dead one. So the Americans killed them when it was clear that they were Vietcong.... And they killed them when it was clear they were not Vietcong.
It was the racist nature of the fighting, the treating of the Vietnamese “like animals,” that inevitably led to My Lai, and it was the reluctance of correspondents to report this racist and atrocious nature of the war that caused the My Lai story to be revealed not by a war correspondent, but by an alert newspaper reporter back in the United States — a major indictment of the coverage of the war.
Page 424 - 428
(Emphasis is original)

So in the reporting of Vietnam each day’s news was swiftly consumed by the next day’s. Too few correspondents looked back and tried to see what it added up to, too few probed beyond the official version of events to expose the lies and half-truths, too few tried to analyse what it all meant. There were language problems: few correspondents spoke French, much less Vietnamese. There were time problems: Kevin Buckley’s investigation into “Operation Speedy Express” took two men two and a half months. And there were cultural problems: apart from Bernard Fall’s and Frances FitzGerald’s, there were no serious attempts to explain to Americans something about the people they were fighting. On the whole, writers for non-daily publications came out better than most of their colleagues because, free from the tyranny of pressing deadlines, they could look at the war in greater depth.
Page 466 – 467