Never leave a mate behind.
Not so some 2,500 National Service conscripts, who, if they choose to or are still able to attend, may face opprobrium and offensive questioning by others, including friends and family, and worst of all, even ostracism as ‘short timers’ from some of their former comrades-in-arms, in clubs and pubs, simply because they do not wear the Republic of Vietnam’s Campaign Medal (RVCM), pictured. That is definitely not right or proper. Must it really continue in this way?
Despite having served just as bravely as their comrades, they have not been equally respected, honoured and recognised and have long been denied the campaign medal which was made available to all military allied personnel who served meritoriously in support of the Republic of Vietnam. Eligibility is determined by Australian authorities. The denial came about due to an unforgivable government blunder many years ago.
This legalistic and bureaucratic denial is solely because they returned home for discharge at the completion of their obligatory National Service period of enlistment, before completing
181 days’ service in the Vietnam War. Contrast this with the fact that even non-combatant philanthropists were given this medal. How unfair and inequitable is that?
From day one in Vietnam, they also faced all the horrors of war. They did their duty to the maximum according to law and had no obligation at all to put off their return back to work, study and family and risk their repatriation entitlements. As highly respected senior army veteran “Warry” George Mansford said: “they were exposed to the battle cry of ‘all for one and one for all.’ In simple terms; to live together, fight together and perhaps die together.” Those who were killed or wounded did, of course, receive the RVCM.
The previous Minister for Veterans’ Affairs and Defence Personnel, with agreement from the then-Minister for Defence, had recommended that approval of the issue of the RVCM go to whole of government consideration, when the election intervened. We were nearly there.
After more than a year in office of the current government, today’s Minister is fully aware of this distressing situation and of the hundreds of people: politicians of all colours, ex-service people and especially Australia’s ex South Vietnamese servicemen and the community, who strongly support these men. The now-Attorney General, Mark Dreyfus even wrote: ‘I can assure you that Federal Labor supports your campaign to have the RVCM awarded … … , on the grounds of individual justice, fairness and equity.’ Other Ministers and ex-Ministers and even ex-Prime Ministers all wrote in the same vein. It is unconscionable that it continues even now.
This continued denial and lack of recognition has led to even deeper withdrawal into isolation, contributed to frustration, despair and worse; even for those who were not already suffering from war caused PTSD that is now being aggravated by their own government’s obstinance and unreasonable delay in seeing them equally and properly recognised. This must stop. Time is now of the essence and Minister Keogh has the power to resolve this matter for the benefit of these veterans.
As the sun sets on another Vietnam Veterans’ Day, will their Minister have stood up and made a decision? Did he act equitably and empathetically and show determined leadership to let these veterans now have this medal?
It would be an immense contribution to our armed forces of tomorrow.
Bert Hoebee (Lieutenant Colonel, Retired) Vietnam Veteran
Have to agree that it is not right by our standards that there is a time limit, unless of course you were KIA or repatriated Home WIA should this occur within the181day time lag before being eligible to the RVCM. Some years ago I supported the NS Association in their attempt to gain approval for the alteration of this time limit to be able to award the medal to those who served under the 181 criteria. The result of my efforts ceased when it was put to me that (not word for word) as the SVN regime no longer
existed they can not agree to their caveat agreement of this question. THE DECISION TO THE 181 DAYS WAS NOT AN AUSTRALIAN ONE, BUT ONE BY THE THEN GOVERNMENT OF SOUTH VIETNAM. IT IS MY GUESS THAT (THAT) IS THE STICKING POINT AND ISSUE. It is logical to assume that as a FOREIGN AWARD our government can ACCEPT or NOT ACCEPT the CONDITIONS of awarding by the awarding government. The US Gov (I believe has, as our governments Defence Honours and Awards Appeals Tribunal 2014) not agreed to any change to the issue of this award. If interested the Tribunals report can be found on https://defence-honours-tribunal.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/RVCM-Inquiry-Report.pdf. Common logic should prevail, and I agree with Brig Mannford’s comments and efforts regarding this award, and a Poet of Military writings, a man I would follow to hell and back. Let the battle continue. PS: Those who belittle our National Service Vietnam and non Vietnam Veterans deserve to rethink their position.
Bert Hoebee (Lieutenant Colonel, Retired), a Vietnam Veteran has not given any insight as to why he was returned to Australia after less than 181 days in the country as he was not wounded. Those who qualified and issued the RCVM need to protect this service medal and Bert needs to explain so all veterans understand.
It is my understanding that Bert was not RTA due to health problems like a mate of mine in 1RAR (1st tour) who returned to Vietnam and served his time with the AATTV to qualify for the RCVM.
Bert, stand tall for what you achieved, as a retired LtCol you have to obey the rules and as an offer expected to set an example for other ranks.
This comment from Attorney General, Mark Dreyfus: ‘I can assure you that Federal Labor supports your campaign to have the RVCM awarded … … , on the grounds of individual justice, fairness and equity.’ – is political smoke and mirror spin!
Please reply to my question, “Why did you return with less than six months of service in the country”?
I agree with Mr Bob Buick Comments As we all new the rules prior to departing Aust.
Lets all except the rules at that time fm over 50 years ago.
Why are still winging about it after the event. That the whole country finds fault with everything.
I am amused that the only one or two naysayers are former regular soldiers who have this campaign medal. And yet there a long list of Vietnam Veterans career soldiers, who have the medal, are 100% in favour of their fellow comrades in arms being officially recognised- more especially since it wasn’t their fault that their lawful and honourable service was cut short.
These men are NOT asking to change or amend the eligibility criteria but to look at the personal equity and fairness of the situation.