Veteran Weaponization

I must declare that I cannot lay claim to the clever title of this blog post. That honour belongs to a twitter account user with the name, “Mid-Career Army Officer”. It perfectly captures what I have been wrestling to phrase for weeks now. I’ve included a link to his account because their content is thought provoking, beautifully written, measured, and relevant to current events. If you are on twitter, be sure to give the account a follow.  

Long before the Freedom Convoy began its trek to Ottawa it has been very interesting to watch the veteran community respond to COVID, mask mandates, travel restrictions, and other public health measures. I’ve heard it said on many occasions that the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) is nothing but a reflection of society; I extend this comparison to it veterans as well. Therefore, it’s not exactly an earth shattering revelation that there isn’t one unified “veteran voice” for those who served in the Canadian Armed Forces when such an entity is nonexistent in the civilian population of our country. 

Which is where the concept of “Veteran Weaponization” arises as a topic of great interest to me.  

Throughout the recent weeks many veterans have made the trek to Ottawa to see or take part in the protest. Some who were unable to travel decided to post videos or make statements on their social media about it. Often this has been done in their day-to-day attire sporting the medals, berets, regimental crests, and qualification badges they were awarded while actively serving. A few exceptionally good friends and former comrades of mine are counted among this group. Some of these veterans have been very vocal about the government, the actions of Prime Minister, and public health measures; others more concerned about The Tomb of the Unknown Soldier and National War Memorial. All wanted to display their status as veterans while attending the protest or making their social media post. Many claimed to speak for all veterans in the process, which is preposterous given how we (veterans) come from such diverse and distinct backgrounds. 

This is where the question of weaponization comes into the discussion.  

There is no doubt that service in the CAF imprints itself indelibly on an individual's unique identity; basic training, battle school, and deployments do that to a person. The military takes civilian you, reduces it through training and indoctrination aiming to instill a powerful sense of national pride and churn out a solider/sailor/aviator. You are then reborn into a world where sayings such as “service before self” and “up to and including unlimited liability” are commonplace. It should be no surprise that many veterans' personal identity is linked to our national identity, which might make it easier to understand why they would want to take part in such substantial numbers during current events.  

But…and this is where it gets interesting…does service in the Canadian Armed Forces, the wearing of medals and memorabilia, impart greater influence to a veteran's opinion when it comes to matters of governance, freedom, and issues of national identity that those who aren’t?  

Or phrased differently; is using your identity as a veteran to influence public opinion to align with your own personal beliefs an expropriation of values and the reputation of the CAF which afforded you that status? 

These are question that makes me smile when I think of the endless number of arguments, debates and discussions it will undoubtedly spawn. Or at least I hope it does, because we need to be having that discussion. 

Every individual who serves in the Canadian Armed Forces has a unique experience. It reminds me of the meme of two CAF officers holding Tim Hortons at the boardwalk at the Kandahar Airfield (KAF) with the text saying something to the effect of, “Afghanistan, individual experiences may vary”. I have no idea who those officers were, but I have no doubt that meme must have been devastating to them. They were serving overseas just like everyone else, away from home and their loved ones, yet someone from their deployment took it upon themselves to ridicule them for the integral part they were playing. It’s what is colloquially referred to as Blue on Blue, friendly fire, or blading; and, if opinions can vary that much in a theatre of war where you’re all supposed to be pulling together to fight an enemy, it’s unfathomable to think that there would be consensus among veterans on an issue so nuanced as our Canadian identity & political landscape. 

This dissonance is played out daily on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok where veterans of the Afghanistan war, Bosnia, the Gulf and Cold War and other conflicts, call on their fellow veterans to join their cause. Posts of “you don’t speak for me” or “what gives you the right” abound. The exchanges range from thought provoking, and maddening, to insane conspiracy or brainwashed ramblings, all subjective to the readers opinion of course.  

This is the crux of the matter. Veterans are individuals, private citizens, “civilians” who are entitled to, and able to voice, their own thoughts and opinions. They are no longer bound by the Code of Service Discipline, QR&O’s, or group think, and, that freedom is intoxicating. They are free to express themselves as they see fit, including the way they wear their medals, and the consequences of their actions are theirs alone. They served their country, earned their awards through their own personal sacrifice and that of their families and can do as they see fit. However, some disagree.  

The counterpoint to the point of view is that the medals earned during a career in the CAF carry with them a responsibility to wear them in retirement, as you would have during your time in uniform. For those without lived CAF experience, this includes funerals, weddings, Remembrance Day, and other formal occasions. After all they were awarded for specific action/duty which was while in the service of a impartial, apolitical organization for which Canadians have a great deal of esteem. What gives an individual the right to wear them to a protest or other personal cause? Is it to imply, impart or influence others into believing that you hold the high ground in moral standing with your opinion on a particular matter simply because of your service? Are you corrupting or degrading that imparted goodwill and elevated status given to you by Canadians, as a veteran of the CAF, in doing so?  

Another factor I suppose is whether or not you consider the CAF to truly be an apolitical organization, free of bias and improper influence from the governing party of the day and the personal political ideology of those in key positions of power? The CAF says it is, but as of late it has had a few small [exaggerated eye roll] problems with several key leaders and a “Do as I say, not as I do!” approach to command which has eroded that image. If the organization and its key leaders are politically supportive of a certain ideology, but not another and it shows in policy such as the Defence Administrative Orders & Directives (DAOD’s), what’s to say that a retired member can’t display there medals in support of the cause of their choice? After all, what’s good for General is good for the Grunt.

I’m sure that there are many other factor which could be discussed here, but I think this might be a good stopping point. I don’t profess to be an expert on the matter, nor do I speak for all veterans and I don’t to know what the answer is, to be honest I’m not sure there is one. I suppose, legislation could be tabled to make it illegal to wear medals at protest to neutralize or negate the weaponization of veteran influence; but I suspect this would go against several aspects of the Charter, and would be political suicide for any political party that proposed it. 

The one thing I am certain of is that a professional pollster would never get a clear consensus if it were put veterans or all Canadians for their opinions. But maybe they should.

All the best,

John