eleven eleven

We start wearing our poppies today.

Sadly, the relative importance of Remembrance Day in Canada depends on a frequently capricious populace. Too often citizens are prodded toward contempt of veterans by spiteful provocateurs rallying against a militarism that exists solely in their imaginations. Malaise, I suppose, is a more common condition – our country has been free from the Total War that engulfed the first half of the twentieth century. Then there is the simplistic equation we all learn in elementary school: war = bad. Add our standard additive of anti-Americanism into the mix and you’ve got yourself a crappy Remembrance Day.

I doubt that this year will be dominated by the spittle-splattering diatribes of  peace activists (like much of the early 1990’s were), but it will be overshadowed by the ever-increasing unpopularity of the mission in Afghanistan.

Remembrance Day is a solemn civic celebration of the unique relationship between soldiers and citizens manifested through the uniquely Canadian mechanisms of Representative Government & Constitutional Monarchy. I realize the philosophical ins-and-outs of the relationship bore most people, and the implications fly over the heads of many more, but the theory behind the employment of the profession-of-arms in Canada – in particular the obligation of unlimited liability – is nevertheless a vital component in our society.

Remembrance Day allows us citizens to take a moment to remember and to thank our fellow citizens who enlisted as soldiers in service of the rest of us. And when we have today, and in the years past, called upon these soldiers to go forth and struggle against the enemies of Canada – some never to return – they obey in proud allegiance to our common democracy. Whether these wars of Canada are ever just is moot. The soldiers do not decide which battles are fought. To do so is anathema to their profession and their honour. The Canadian citizenry – through their elected representatives – instructs the military where to go, what to do, who to fight, and – when required – to forfeit their lives.

This type of special relationship between citizens deserves to be commemorated annually. The ceremony assists in binding all of us together. Remembrance Day is an act of renewing our vows as a citizen of Canada.

Yes, Beware of the Atomic Robot

Deserting Soldiers

A few years ago, when I was working full-time in the Canadian Forces, I remember facilitating an all-ranks discussion about ethics. The audience was mainly comprised of Reservists, a young but serious and thoughtful group. Running out of time I proposed a final question: “is it ethical to kill people?”

The first response came from a Christian in the class: “The Bible says: thou shall not kill. This is how I was raised. It is hard to get around that. Killing is such a final, violent conclusion. At the end of the day, with all my upbringing and education, I don’t think I could do it?”

It was an honest and admirable answer, so I asked a follow-up question: “So is it ethical for you to have joined the Army?”

I left them to ponder the implications.

choice

This is a philosophical debate that our Parliament currently faces. Liberal MP Gerard Kennedy has tabled a private member’s bill proposing an amendment to our immigration legislation that would oblige the Immigration Minister to allow “war deserters” to stay in Canada.

The apparent intention of Kennedy’s bill is to stop the imminent deportation of US military deserters who are seeking to stay in Canada. The deserters are ostensibly “resisting” the Iraq War.

This debate feels oddly dated. As if I should be listening to Sticky Fingers and wearing bell-bottoms. Certainly the popular rhetoric around the Iraq War is steeped in Vietnam allusions, but the reality in America is different. There is no draft – America’s military today is made up completely of volunteers.

It takes the utmost moral courage to stand against one’s country and comrades. Refusing a legal and legitimate order because of personal beliefs takes a lot of guts. I think most people understand and respect that.

But running away to Canada is not courageous. It commands no respect.

It is unclear why these deserters did not stay in the United States and accept their legal reprimands and punishments. A sampling of those punishments indicate prison sentences of 2 – 13 months. For most of the deserters this is less time than they would have been in Iraq. It seems a fair enough conseuqence.

So why does Kennedy want to help these people evade their personal legal difficulties?

Well, because these deserters are decent enough folk. And most Canadians think the Iraq War was bad. The popular conclusion is therefore: let them stay.

But it is more complicated than that.

The most fundamental principle governing military in democratic society is that the civilian government calls the shots. They tell soldiers where and when to fight. But when soldiers start refusing government orders bad things happen.

What does this proposed amendment of Kennedy’s really say about values and beliefs? Is it okay to break personal vows and oaths and run away from justice?

John Ivison dissects several flaws of the proposal in the National Post today.

I can’t really blame Kennedy. I’m sure he doesn’t know much about the profession of arms. I know that he isn’t conscious of how this slights Canada’s  own military professionals, how it mocks their honour. I’m sure he isn’t considering how this lessens civilian control over soldiers and politicizes military personnel.

I hope the collective experience and wisdom of Parliament can fully consider the question: “is it ethical to help people break their promises?”

Fratricide

In 2007, when I was working full-time in the Canadian Army, I printed off a CBC news article with a large picture of Cpl. Kevin Megeney above it. I added in large letters: “Why Weapons Handling Skills Matter.” We train (and train and train) our soldiers to take the proper precautions around weapons – especially to ensure their weapons are properly cleared and unloaded. Our business is serious; I tell my soldiers never to point a weapon in jest – we train to kill.

Some never learn these lessons, despite our best efforts.

Today, Cpl. Matthew Wilcox was sentenced to four years in prison for negligent performance of duty and criminal negligence causing the death of Cpl. Kevin Megeney – his friend.

Wilcox had a professional responsibility to properly handle his weapon, to make sure it was properly cleared. A pistol is not a toy, and these men had a professional responsibility not to treat it as such. Can horseplay with weapons ever lead to anything good?

That Wilcox never intended to cause harm to Megeney does not soften the blow. There is no silver-lining to this story: one man is dead – and missed desperately by his friends and family; another will go to prison, kicked out of the Canadian Forces, and forced to start a new life forever overshadowed with remorse and regret.

~Cpl. Wilcox’s charge sheet
~National Defence Act

Dead Grits?

There have been three byelections since the 2007 general election in Saskatchewan. The Saskatchewan Liberal Party has only fielded a candidate for one of these byelections. That candidate was Eileen Gelowitz, who ran in the 2007 election for the Saskatchewan Party in an adjacent riding. In 2007, Gelowitz earned  2182 votes for the Saskatchewan Party (34.2% of the vote) – but in this week’s byelection she garnered exactly 107 votes (2.6%) for the Liberal Party.

A recent article in the Star Phoenix by reporter James Wood explores the byelection loss and the possible implications for the Liberal Party.

It is clear that the Liberal Party has failed to carve out place for itself in the narrow Saskatchewan political spectrum. Former leader David Karwacki failed to get a single Liberal candidate elected in two general elections and several byelections. And he saw the popular vote share of his party decline to 9.4%.

The new Liberal leader (who was acclaimed) Ryan Bater has decided to take the Liberal Party down a different road, emphasizing personal and economic freedom (a libertarianism-lite?) and is a stark departure from the policies established by Karwacki and his team. And while there is nothing inherently off-putting in Bater’s new messages, his changes have weakened his party’s visibility. The lack of consistency further undermines these listless liberals.

Looking at the popular vote numbers in Saskatchewan, it seems clear that a third party can only surge when an established party is in decline. The CCF/NDP arose at the expense of the Progressive Conservatives in the 1930’s. The Progressive Conservatives reemerged at the expense of the Liberals in the 1970’s. The Saskatchewan Party emerged at the expense of the Liberals in the 1990’s (indeed, the emergence of the Saskatchewan Party occurred through a violent hemorrhaging of the Liberal Party). With strong base support for both the Saskatchewan Party and the NDP, it is unlikely that the Liberal Party (or the Greens or any other party) will be able to mobilize enough voter and monetary support to manage to elect any candidates in the near future.

My prediction is that Liberal Party support will sink to near all-time lows (<5%) in the 2011 election. But that’s two years away – and that’s a very long time in politics.

Liberal popular vote levels in Saskatchewan general elections:

2007: 9.4%
2003: 14.18% (Karwacki)
1999: 20.15% (Melenchuk)
1995: 34.70% (Haverstock)
1991: 23.29%
1986: 9.99%
1982: 4.51% (Goodale)
1978: 13.78%
1975: 31.67%
1971: 42.82%
1967: 45.57% (Thatcher)

Wake a Ray-Gun

For the past 48 hours I have been reading Robert J. Sawyer’s most recent novel: Wake. It has been awhile since I’ve read Sawyer, or any science-fiction, so I was surprised by Sawyer’s writing style: it is clean writing, simple in its structure and vocabulary, and the effect is crisp and compelling story-telling.

I am not usually a fan of stories from the viewpoint of teenagers or children – Wake is partially told from the point-of-view of a teenage girl – because I find them inauthentic. Perhaps because this is science fiction, I’ve allowed myself to suspend my disbelief more than normal and I’m enjoying this character. However, the character is, IMHO, far too bright, rational, and articulate to be a realistic portrayal, but in the age of witty televised teenage characters (Gilmore Girls, Dawsons Creek, etc) the end product is not too disjointing and is effectively enjoyable.

Wake is situated in the present or the very near present, and the book is peppered with real-world references: many of them are Canadian. Indeed, Sawyer goes out of his way to reference Canada, and some of the time it feels a little forced. I remember this from previous Sawyer novels, so this won’t shock any Sawyer readers. It is interesting to note that Sawyer brings out mainly stereotypes and worn tropes that Canadians constantly use as touchstones in their own national conversation, everything from public health care to Margaret Atwood. I haven’t detected anything new on this front.

I am being perhaps overly critical of Sawyer. This is probably because I’m suspect of Sawyer’s philosophical worldview. This might be baseless, but I’ve felt this was ever since I read his op-ed piece in Macleans magazine in 2002, “Privacy: Who Needs it?“. I realize this was a promotional piece, nevertheless…

The central theme of the book is the concept of consciousness or sentience. Several plot-lines in the book revolve around exploring this theme. Overall, Sawyer does an excellent job.  The problem Sawyer identifies and seeks to overcome is that (for all we can conceive) intelligence can only evolve if it has some sort of sensory data of and active agency in the real world. It is difficult to imagine how an artificial intelligence could possibly overcome these obstacles. In the end Sawyer does a decent job – given that he has limited space in which to work out such an evolution.

a Ray Gun

I was moved by certain elements in Wake to go to Sawyer’s website. It was there that I was referred, almost randomly, to The Ray-Gun: A Love Story. This short piece of science fiction was written by a friend of Sawyer, James Alan Gardner, whom I’d never read before. Sawyer conveniently posted a link to an online version of the story. I read it while sitting at my desk at lunch.

What a great read! As long as you are okay with the stripped down, slightly wry narrative, you’ll be rewarded with an excellent story. The Ray-Gun was shortlisted for a Hugo this year, and has half-a-dozen, mostly positive, reviews kicking around the web.

This simple, straight-forward story centres on a teenage boy who finds a ray-gun. The ray-gun subsequently goes on to play a central role in his life, affecting his relationships and his path in life. Despite the simple narrative, the story has an allegorical power in it. The ray-gun device is somewhere along the continuum between a McGuffin and Chekov’s gun, depending on how much weight you give certain theories about the ray-gun that arise during the story. The story ultimately has a lot to say about relationships and growing-up. The story – in spite of its ray-gun centerpiece – rings true, with believable characters.

The Ray-Gun failed to win the Hugo in its category, likely because (as pointed out in one of the reviews I read) it isn’t very “science-fictiony.” But I don’t think it serves the genre very well to take that approach.

Regardless, it is a great story, a quick and fun read, and I highly recommend it.

Le Soldat Oublie

Le Soldat Oublie

Our Military History Bookclub is currently reading The Forgotten Soldier by Guy Sajer, first published in French as Le Soldat Oublie in 1967.

The book is the memoir of Guy Sajer who served as a young conscript (16 or 17) in Germany’s army on the Eastern Front in World War II.

This book is standard on most professional military reading lists and is regarded as a classic memoir of warfare. Nevertheless, the book’s very readable narrative combined with the occasional factual error have promoted some to regard the work as fiction. The controversy, including arguments by detractors and proponents is more-or-less explained fully in this set of articles.

There are many other reviews of the book online (one example here at WW2 Database) and the book is often discussed in forums (one here at militaryphotos.net).

An excerpt from one of the books descriptive scenes of intense battle take place while Sajer is fighting with three-four companies of his Division against 300-400 Russian partisans:

I saw more partisans pouring from their log fort, and firing point blank at out men, who were exhilarated by the success of our action. In the general confusion, I opened fire along with everyone else. A tall Russian fired at me three times without hitting me, although I made no effort to dodge him. Then he rushed at me, shouting and waving his gun, holding the butt in the air. Two of our men joined me and faired at the Russian. He fell and tried to reload his gun, but we jumped him immediately, battering him with out butts. He died under our blows.

This is not (by far) the most brutal passage in the book, but it gives the general flavour of chaos and savageness that characterized combat on the war’s Eastern Front.

Many of Sajer’s most  terrifying passages don’t concern combat at all: merely surviving Russian winters with poor equipment and support is an epic struggle in itself.

For about the last one hundred pages of the book the author deviates away from narrative description of events and moves into a narrative description of his emotional/physical state. The feeling for the reader is much like the end of the film Apocalypse Now wherein sense and civilization break down into a more brutish existence. Sajer’s attitude is clearly revealed from this passage near the end of the book:

We were trying to snatch a short rest in a cellar, where a doctor was delivering a child. The cellar was vaulted and lit by a few hastily rigged lanterns. If the birth of a child is usually a joyful event, this particular birth only seemed to add to the general tragedy. The mother’s screams no longer had any meaning in a world made of screams, and the wailing child seemed to regret the beginning of its life.

From Sajer’s point-of-view it seems that nearly all authority and organization within the Reich of completely fallen to pieces. This isn’t likely the precise situation. But from the viewpoint of a young non-commissioned infanteer – devoid of a sense of the larger picture – it must certainly have appeared that Germany had ceased to function.

The reader is left without a satisfactory conclusion, however. Like Sajer himself the reader is left without a clear understanding of the meaning of his War and even less understanding of how Sajer is to survive in the Peace.

In short, this book reflects the emotions of a soldier at war very well. The hardships that soldiers routinely endure are vividly communicated and will be well understood by those with military experience. The narrative is engaging but bogs down in a drudgery of suffering in the end. The reader’s suffering is, of course, muted by that of the soldiers (from all sides) who slaved through a land war in Asia.

Military History Bookclub

Military History Bookclub: founded in early 2009 by three chaps who work at the University of Saskatchewan. There are eight current members.

Currently Reading:

The Forgotten Solider, by Guy Sajer. (The Forgotten Soldier, Fact or Fiction?)

Next in Queue:

A Bright Shining Lie: John Paul Vann and America in Vietnam (1988), by Neil Sheehan.

Completed:

Ivan’s War: Life and Death in the Red Army, 1939-1945, by Catherine Merridale. New York Times: Book review.

Nemesis: The Battle for Japan, 1944-45, by Max Hastings.

The Nazi Conscience, by Claudia Koonz.

Ivan’s War

Next up for our military book club is Ivan’s War: Life and Death in the Red Army, 1939-1945 by Catherine Merridale (US edition, published by Henry Holt & Co.).

Catherine Merridale is the author of the 2002 book Night of Stone: Death and Memory in Twentieth-Century Russia, a book that “explores Russian perceptions of death and afterlife from before the Bolshevik Revolution, through both world wars and the great famines of the 1930s and into the present.”

Ivan’s War promises to be an excellent follow-up to the club’s previous book, Nemesis, Max Hasting’s analysis of the final year of war in the Pacific. Moreover, after Ivan’s War we’ll be reading Forgotten Soldier, Guy Sajer’s tale of the Eastern Front through the eyes of a German soldier. The juxtaposition of these two books will undoubtedly be enlightening.

Sleepwalking Five

Picked up a couple of books at Indigo today with a $25 gift card I had kicking around: The Somnambulist, by Jonathan Barnes, and Slaughterhouse Five, by you know. No, I haven’t yet gotten around to reading this classic. I’m taking it with me to San Francisco.

But I’ve already started into the Somnambulist. I hadn’t heard of it before, but I found the title intriguing when I stumbled across it in the discount books. The reviews were favourable. I’m in twenty pages and I’m glad I picked it up: it’s a page-turner, light and witty.

When I finish it, I’ll leave a review here.