Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Canada's Status as a Safe Haven for War Resisters Is Under Attack

By Jessica Pupovac, AlterNet. Posted July 14, 2008.


As Canadian immigration officials stand poised to deport U.S. war resisters, activists and Parliament work to provide a safe haven.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

On the Fourth of July, as Americans everywhere tossed burgers on the grill, lit firecrackers and saluted service members past and present, Robin Long, a former soldier from Boise, Idaho, was taken into police custody in the small town of Nelson, British Columbia, just 30 miles north of the U.S.-Canadian border. He has lived there since June 2004, when he deserted his platoon as it prepared to ship off for Iraq. Long has since married a Canadian woman and has a 2-year-old Canadian-born son. But unless federal courts grant a stay of deportation requested last week by his attorney, Long could become the first U.S. war resister to face deportation -- as early as Monday, July 14.

Just last week, another war resister, Corey Glass, narrowly averted deportation -- for the time being -- when a federal court granted him a stay while his case makes its way through the Canadian legal system. Dozens of other cases remain in a similar state of legal limbo. Eight could result in imminent deportation.

An estimated 200 former U.S. military personnel have sought sanctuary in Canada since the U.S. invasion of Iraq in March 2003. However, thus far, not one has been forcibly returned to U.S. soil -- and remain in U.S. military custody, where they are likely to face charges for desertion. Long's deportation, if it goes through, would mark an official end to Canada's tradition of welcoming American war resisters, a practice that began during the Vietnam War and has continued, albeit informally, to this day.

Long, 25, applied for refugee status shortly after his arrival in Canada, on the grounds that the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq was "illegal" and his participation would therefore make him complicit in international war crimes. In 2007, the Immigration Refugee Board rejected his application but sidestepped taking a position on the legality of the U.S. occupation of Iraq, ruling instead that the "illegality of the war was not relevant" to the board's decision. After Bob Ages of the Vancouver War Resisters Support Campaign put up $5,000, Long was released on the condition that he inform the Canadian Border Services Agency of his whereabouts once a month. Lacking a worker's permit, however, Long testified at last week's immigration hearing that he has been unable to pay rent and was "couch surfing" among friends and supporters in the small town of Nelson. The CBSA issued a warrant for him on the basis of his not reporting his whereabouts and thus was in noncompliance with the terms of his release.

Long's supporters fear that, despite strong support from the Canadian public and their representatives, his possible deportation would be the first of many. It is a repercussion they have feared ever since Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper, a staunch supporter of the "coalition of the willing," took office in February 2006.

Last week, as Glass faced deportation, demonstrators in at least six Canadian and 14 U.S. cities held vigils outside immigration centers and Canadian embassies, urging immigration officials to adopt a blanket sanctuary policy rather than allow each case to trickle through the legal process, one that costs Canadian taxpayers millions of dollars and imposes immeasurable duress on war resisters and their families.

"It seems almost as if they grabbed Robin Long for insurance in case we succeeded in stopping the deportation of Corey Glass," said Gerry Condon, a former Canadian resident and founder of Project Safe Haven, a network of Vietnam War resisters who advocate for and support war resisters today.

Derek Giffin, an Iraq veteran from Schererville, Ind., traveled to Chicago for a vigil held there on July 9 that attracted approximately 50 Vietnam veterans, high school students and recently returned Iraq vets. Giffin said he made the trip in honor of a member of his platoon who was recalled after serving one year in Iraq, but decided instead to defect and now resides in Canada. "I'm here to stand in solidarity with my friend," he told AlterNet.

Adam Navarro-Lowery, spokesperson for the Chicago chapter of Iraq Veterans Against the War, which organized the Chicago vigil along with Veterans for Peace, the War Resister Support Campaign and the American Friends Service Committee, said he and other members came to the vigil both the support their fellow service members who oppose the war and "to thank the Canadian Parliament and the people of Canada for welcoming war resisters."

"It is our hope that the Harper government will acknowledge the will of the people and seal the deal," he said.

Canadians Support War Resisters

According to a national poll released by Angus Reid Strategies on June 27, "a majority (67 percent) of Canadians would agree with the decision to let American deserters stay in Canada as permanent residents." On June 3, the House of Commons passed a nonbinding resolution mirroring that position, calling on the Immigration Ministry to freeze the deportation of U.S. war resisters and allow them to apply for permanent residency within Canada.

However, the move, which has no official standing, was immediately followed by a statement from the Immigration Ministry distancing itself from the resolution and stating that it would continue to assess each case separately, based on "individual merits," as opposed to allowing sanctuary as a class.

Critics claim that, since service members volunteer for duty and are not drafted, as many were during the Vietnam War, they should abide by their legal agreements regardless of personal political beliefs. It is a stipulation citied in the Immigration and Refugee Board's denial of many war resisters' applications for refugee status. However, as most denials have been appealed or taken to the federal courts, none have yet to prompt a forced deportation.

Liz Rivera Goldstein, a counter-recruitment activist who attended a July 9 vigil in Seattle, argues that the service members' legal contracts should be annulled because of the circumstances surrounding the Iraq War. "The particular situation that we're in now is very different because so much information has come out that the war is illegal and that we were lied to," she said. "I think that many of the soldiers that enlist went in for wonderful reasons. They want to serve their country and protect the people they love and protect their country -- but going to Iraq is not the mission where they will accomplish that," she told AlterNet.

Goldstein, who sat in on the civilian hearings for war resister Lt. Ehren Watada in 2007, said she didn't realize how much Watada "really loved the military." "It was his career, his choice. He wanted all of it, and he lost all of it," she said. "But he refused to serve in a war that he saw as illegal and immoral."

Watada is now working a desk job at Fort Lewis, awaiting the results of an Army challenge to a civilian court injunction against his second court-martial. "He should have been out a year ago in December," said Goldstein. "There's no justice in the military."

Patty McCann, a member of the Chicago chapter of IVAW, told AlterNet that it is harder to get out of military service than people might think. "The chain of command tells us, 'You can't apply for conscientious objector status.'" she said. "Our captain told us that, and we believed what he told us." On top of that, she said, service members face harassment, ostracism and even physical abuse. "I don't know anybody who managed to apply for CO status and had a smooth ride," she said.

A Victory in the Courts

In Canada, absent a change in immigration policy that would grant U.S. war resisters a smoother path to legal residence, the battle is likely to play out in federal courts, where the greatest victory to date for the campaign in support of U.S. resisters came less than two weeks ago. Joshua Key, an Iraq war veteran who, according to court documents, participated in more than 70 nighttime raids on the homes of Iraqi civilians, appealed and won a reconsideration of his refugee application on July 4, when Federal Court Justice Robert Barnes sent his case back to the Immigration and Refugee Board. Barnes ruled that the IRB applied too narrow of an interpretation of international law to Key's case when it rejected his application, and that it should base his status not only on whether he would be forced to commit war crimes or crimes against humanity, but also whether he would fit within the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees Handbook's definition of a refugee. Specifically, Barnes ruled that "military action which systematically degrades, abuses or humiliates either combatants or noncombatants is capable of supporting a refugee claim where that is the proven reason for refusing to serve." He ordered the IRB to reconsider Key's application, which would also allow his wife, Brandi Key, and their four children to remain with him in Canada.

Key's lawyer, Jeffrey House, himself a Vietnam-era war resister who has remained in Canada, told AlterNet that Key's ruling set a precedent that he hopes will be applicable in similar claims. He said it was unclear as to whether Key's case resulted in Glass' stay of deportation last week, as the court did not release an opinion. But, when asked whether he intends to use the Key ruling to defend other war resister clients, he said, "It's the law, so we expect to be allowed to use the law."

But, for now, regardless of how long war resisters in Canada are allowed to stay, the real question for many is how soon they can return. Key says his family and friends are in the United States, as well as his children's grandparents, and every year that he has to wait before going home -- and potentially leaving his family to serve time in a military prison -- is a hardship.

Although most war resisters thus far have served sentences of three months to one year, the Uniform Code of Military Justice proscribes "such other punishment as a court-martial may direct," including capital punishment "if the offense is committed in time of war."

However, it is highly unlikely that such a severe punishment will be doled out in the foreseeable future, particularly with the number of deserters the Iraq War has thus far produced. Since 2003, the Pentagon has reported at least 15,718 Army, 4,957 Marine, 9,037 Navy and 177 Air Force deserters.

During the Chicago vigil, the U.S. State Department, rather than Canadian officials, came to the front of the building that houses the Canadian Embassy, where they informed the crowd that they would not be granted an audience with Canadian officials. They would, however, permit two representatives of the crowd to meet with two Canadian officials in the lobby.

Patty McCann went inside with "Lobo," a vocal anti-war veteran and member of Veterans for Peace. After emerging from the brief encounter, McCann told the crowd that all the officials could do was bring back her message, which, she said, was that "resistance should not be considered a crime, but an act of heroism and of patriotism."

Lobo echoed her words, adding that he and others like him will continue to demonstrate "until we can bring them home as the law-abiding and honorable individuals they are."

"They honored their oath to preserve and defend the Constitution," he said. "They refused to follow unlawful orders -- and that's the key."

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: iraq, iraq war, canada, war resisters

Jessica Pupovac is an adult educator and independent journalist living in Chicago.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from World! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Canada, the last class-act
Posted by: weathered on Jul 14, 2008 1:26 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ugly Americans are putting pressure on Ottawa - it won't work, Canadians are much stronger and wiser then our arrogant beliefs.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Canada, the last class-act Posted by: weathered
» RE: Canada, the last class-act Posted by: willymack
Don't get your hopes up.
Posted by: CanuckKid on Jul 14, 2008 8:04 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The era of 70's war-resisting is much different than that of today. Pierre Trudeau was renown throughout this country for standing up to Washington. This was the man to whom Nixon referred as an "asshole" - Trudeau's response was a characteristic shrug, and (my favourite Trudeau quote) "I've been called worse by better people..." The whole country had a measure of respect for him after that - even many Albertans, though they would have a hard time admitting it, I suspect....!

Stephen Harper, as has been noted, is an altogether different Prime Minister. If he has to cast a couple of conscientious objectors to the wolves to stay in Bush's good books, he'll do it. The attitude of many Canadians (some who voted for him, some not) is that these deserters made a voluntary commitment to the army of their country - unlike the Vietnam-era army, they weren't conscripted into it, and it being the army, you can't walk away when it starts getting unpleasant. They joined an institution whose the primary purpose is to kill people - all armies are the same in that respect. What were they expecting?

I know it's a contentious position, but quite frankly, it's a hard one for me to refute, as much as I want these guys to stay in Canada.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Don't get your hopes up. Posted by: ShoShenQ
This desertion is another crime Bush should answer for.
Posted by: reelectnoone on Jul 14, 2008 8:13 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"They honored their oath to preserve and defend the Constitution," he said. "They refused to follow unlawful orders -- and that's the key."
--

I think the Iraq war over-all should be considered a breach of contract between soldiers and the Pentagon.

Bush disgraced America by launching an invasion against another nation, not just because he used lies to "justify" the war, but because we were never in any danger from Iraq, there was no terror connection and no WMD's.

Iraq did possess one thing that was very dangerous to their own survival however. Oil.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Instead of running away, why not work on ABOLISHING both parties first.
Posted by: maxpayne on Jul 14, 2008 8:30 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Look, running away isn't going to solve a thing. War resistors should have the courage to fight the war machine from the bottom on up. Gun your bastards at the local level, in businesses, community get togethers, state level, and the finally on to the federal level. Or at least try them all as simultaneously as possible. But whatever you do, RUNNING AWAY WILL NOT WORK !

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Learn more about activism for nonviolence
Posted by: lokicat on Jul 14, 2008 9:40 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Readers might want to know about resource for soldiers, awol or contemplating going awol, at Quaker House (see newsletter at www.quakerhouse.org). First person accounts.

There's a lot of info that the general public doesn't know and the situation is fluid. Also read The Deserter's Tale by Joshuma Key as told to Lawrence Hill, Anans/Harper Collins, Canada, 240 pg. paperback.

I'm not a Quaker but they have been doing non-violence advocacy work for a couple hundred years.
Also check out an educational film, six half-hour videotapes called "A Force More Powerful" (licensed for use in classrooms, libraries, and institutions). Some libraries have it. www.films.com Also available in print by the same title.
Also check: www.nonviolent-conflict.org

Gretchen Robinson

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

CANADA AND WAR RESISTERS
Posted by: david.model@senecac.on.ca on Jul 14, 2008 10:00 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am a Canadian and I am not so proud of my country as I was 24 years ago. When Canada sent troops to Afghanistan and committed itself to supporting American war crimes in that country I cringed in despair as we have joined the Bush Administration in their foreign policy adventures.

Afhganistan is another Iraq or worse where the people support the Taliban not the occupiers and where many innocent people have died. The Northern Alliance and Warlords are worse than the Taliban and with America's support are engaged in a civil war with the Taliban..

Previous Prime Ministers of Canada have taken a somewhat more independent stance and didn't automatically comply with American requests for support. We have so far refused to accept nuclear weapons on our soil and refused to participate in the Missle Defense system. On the other hand we are part of NORAD and allow American nuclear-armed submarines to dock in our ports.

Our current Prime Minister, S. Harper, seems to agree with American foreign policy objectives and is further destroying Canada's reputation as a middle power pursing diplomacy rather than the use of force.

As for war resisters, they are people who think for themselves and recognize that their country is committing war crimes in Iraq and Afghnaistan. I support their decision to refuse to be part of those crimes.

http://www.stateofdarkness.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Afghanistan isn't Iraq Posted by: rickiey
C'mon up...
Posted by: Knowmad on Jul 14, 2008 10:28 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Though it is often exaggerated, on average it seems we do have a calmer and less reactive approach to life up here – with the possible exception of Toronto, my birthplace. The ‘on average’ proviso is important, because as you Americans well know, one mouldy apple can taint an entire truckload with one smear. Your recent New Yorker cover for example, which thinking people ‘get’ is still a dangerous game, as one of our own ‘snownecks’ could misconstrue something like that and turn it into a campaign poster for our child PM harper, helping him in his apparent goal to make us the 51st state; a red one at that. Fortunately that’s pretty unlikely. Though we too have our share of doomsayers and conspiracy-mongers and just plain whackos, the idea is just too ‘conservo-biblethumpin’American’ to catch on most here, regardless of our current neocon, self-serving ‘leadership’.

It has and will likely always be friendlier and less domineering here when it comes to a warmongering agenda. The key reason is because we tend to place our emphasis and value less on patriotism and country and global dominance, and more on people, rights and freedoms; thus we’re far less prone to not only allowing a misguided leadership to have it’s way, but to even letting that leadership stay in power. Our system provides an ‘escape clause’, the luxury of ‘throwing the bums out’ if they’re screwing up too much, as harper and his minions are very close to experiencing. Unfortunately under your system you have to endure crazed, murderous thugs like the chushrovian cabal (and McWannabe of course) for at least four years before you can get relief, assuming they don’t indulge in oral sex.

All the above to say I think it’s highly unlikely that Canada will not continue to be a refuge for those who make the mistake of trusting your bent politicos, regardless of what our sleazy PM does to follow orders. We’ve been helping oppressed and ‘of-conscience’ Americans since the slavery era - why would we stop now? Because a pathetic, short-sighted, corpobush-fawning PM tries to force us to . . . don’t think so.

So tell those in need to c’mon up – it’s not as if we don’t have the room.

Cheers.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Support The War Resisters!!
Posted by: penobscotdziekuje@yahoo.com on Jul 14, 2008 3:19 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
C'mon, Canada, you must grant our defectors asylum. We don't mean Canadians any harm.
Canada, a nation of boy/girl scouts, is a wonderful and open-minded place. Your country is more progressive-socially speaking, than America.
There are plenty of us here who opposed this senseless "war"; and, to tie up their cases is dangerous.
For too long our government has been getting away with murder and isn't comforting to know that some will not tak up arms against Iraq. It's not their fight.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Intolerance
Posted by: sicntired on Jul 14, 2008 8:53 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There is an air of intolerance that is running through Canadian society and it's been propagated and nurtured by the Canadian press.Parliament voted to allow these men to stay here.Stephen Harper and his dogmatic driven ideological government has once again told the majority of Canadians to pound sand.As Colbert would say:"Election please".

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I disagree
Posted by: rickiey on Jul 14, 2008 9:16 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ok, the war in Iraq is wrong. Lets get that out of the way first, and foremost, because it is simple truth. The war in Iraq is wrong.

But it wasn't illegal. Everything was done correctly, according to the Constitution. And nothing over-rides the Constitution (except the Supreme Court sometimes, but they aren't supposed to-sorry, thats a different rant).

Ok, these war resistors. Great men of conscience, right? Well, no they aren't. If this was 2003, or even 2004, you could make the case.

But it isn't. This is 2008, and that means that anyone who is currently in the military, voluntarily signed up for the military, DURING THE IRAQ WAR. Now, some may have been in before it started, tis true. But to be in now, they had to have re-enlisted during this occupation.

So why sign up for a war, if you don't have the conscience to go? It makes no sense. But it does make sense to sign up for a war and not go, if you are merely trying to make headlines.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» I agree Posted by: Axiom69
» Think a little deeper... Posted by: Knowmad
» Illegal vs. Legal Posted by: login@bugmenot.com
» RE: Illegal vs. Legal Posted by: rickiey
» RE: Think a little deeper... Posted by: Axiom69
» Why I joined Posted by: Axiom69
» RE: Why I joined Posted by: Knowmad
» No matter how deep you look Posted by: rickiey
» Watch where you aim Posted by: Axiom69
» RE: Think a little deeper... Posted by: rickiey
» RE: I disagree Posted by: sicntired
Harper
Posted by: modeler on Jul 15, 2008 2:28 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
is well known as a Bushit buttkisser. He would like nothing better than get rid of anyone who refuses to serve in Iraq. He obviously never heard or knows about the great deciders decision to go AWOL instead of doing his miltary duties.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

this is a decision made by Canadian courts...
Posted by: Bearzerker on Jul 20, 2008 4:51 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... and is a system that's uses compromise!

their is nothing political here so stop blaming Harper with B.S. politics on this...
besides Harper's a disaster in his own right, and comparisons to Bush43 does Bush43 a disservice!

I like our system of justice over many other models so the criticisms posted on this thread, over persons that volunteered... [no draft involved] ...being returned, is to honor a contract signed!
Which is enough for me to applaud the decisions being made!
Please, don't make a mockery of our [Canada's] judicial system by politicizing it!
When in reality, no politics is or was ever involved!

That said...
I agree with the decisions made...
because, I don't think we can force change in another country [US] by simply allowing it's dissenters in an illegal war protections under our laws, and in which they had volunteered to participate in.
Allowing this [to me] would be just plain rude and arrogant!
If, on the other hand it was a Canadian, that went to and volunteered for the US Military, then I would say protections are needed as the Iraq war was, and remains to this day, an illegal action and Canada has an Obligation to protect its citizens from illegal activities being sanctioned against them by foreign political movements! [eg. Omar Kadr]

Please... don't compare these current dissenters to Vietnam "DRAFT DODGERS" as those WERE pressed into service against their will, and under our customs and practices ...deserved protection...

Canada has and will always be about Volunteerism...
Every conflict we've been involved in from 1812 til today was prosecuted for and by volunteers!
I myself am a Canadian Volunteer and served my country in a declared War.
so yes, I know what it means to put your life on the line!

I would like to point out that IMHO, there's nothing volunteer about the US military...
Once they have you, your theirs... lock stock and barrel.

Some very good people work for this machine, but IMHO, the machine is broken [way to big]... if the US really wants a truly volunteer force, then allow a person to leave when they want to after their initial term of service is done... allow a person [not in theater] to put in his 30 days notice... or if under 20 years... 60-180 days notice depending.

I must stress that we remember "Real Wars" demand prudence and commitments from everyone!
But this is "NOT" a War... it is in reality "a police action!"

YOU CAN NOT DECLARED WAR ON A CONCEPT A PERSON OR ORGANIZATION!
NATIONS GO TO WAR, AND PEOPLE FIGHT IN WARS BETWEEN NATION STATES!
THE REST IS HUBRIS AND POLITICAL BS

THIS IS "THE WHY" AND "THE WHAT" THAT BUSH43 WILL BE MOCKED AND REMEMBERED FOR,
THROUGH OUT ALL HISTORY AND TIME!


what a moron

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Canada Safe Haven? You Bet! Been There Before; Being There Again!!
Posted by: randall777 on Jul 28, 2008 6:39 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It doesn't make any difference if US citizens are fleeing a foreign war or, the War On Drugs. I helped war resisters, deserters and dodgers alike, in the past. I'll do it again despite the efforts of the US lackeys running the Canadian government. Where do I linkup?

Randall St Jacques
Windsor Ontario Canada

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement