The End of the Vietnam War: Conscience, Resistance, and Reconciliation, 1973

 This text is provided courtesy of the Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History. This text includes a primary source by Edward M. Kennedy.

(Glider Lehrman Collection)

Edward Kennedy to Mr. Thursby, April 25, 1973

Vietnam was “America’s longest war.” While US operations tended to be very limited between 1945 and 1964, escalation in the early months of 1965 eventually led to the deployment of more than 2.5 million military personnel to South Vietnam through 1973.

While the literature on the Vietnam War is voluminous, the issue of draft resistance has either been overlooked or misunderstood by historians. Most people in fact do make a distinction between draft evasion and draft resistance. The virtual omission of draft resistance from the historical accounts of the Vietnam War is a manifestation of the period’s nagging effect on American culture and memory.

In January 1973, the Paris Peace Accords officially ended US involvement in the Vietnam War, although the majority of US troops would not leave until August of that year and the fighting between North and South Vietnam would continue until the fall of Saigon in 1975. Americans faced the daunting task of reuniting their own country torn apart by participation in a politically divisive and brutal conflict halfway around the world. The American public had become polarized in a way that it had not been since the Civil War.

This letter, written in April 1973 by Senator Edward Kennedy, discusses the need to care for those who served in Southeast Asia and to forgive those who “refused induction” for moral reasons so “that the nation can turn its attention to reconciliation and healing the wounds and bitterness created by this long and costly conflict.”

Although the question of amnesty occupies more than half of this letter, Kennedy made it clear that caring for America’s servicemen was his top priority:

But the first and immediate task is to care for the addict, the jobless and the wounded veterans home from Southeast Asia. It is our nation’s responsibility to help them right now. And only after we can insure that they are given every opportunity to rebuild their lives, can we then seek the answers to amnesty with the ultimate goal of restoring to our country the unity which this long and cruel conflict divided.

The issue of amnesty was tackled by Presidents Gerald R. Ford and Jimmy Carter. On September 16, 1974, President Ford issued a conditional amnesty proclamation for those who had evaded the draft, provided that they reaffirmed their allegiance to the United States and agreed to serve two years in a public service job. In 1977, just one day after his election, President Carter unconditionally pardoned anyone who had avoided the draft.

Unfortunately, Kennedy’s hopes for supporting servicemen returning from Southeast Asia were not realized. Many returned home to hostile receptions, limited mental health care, and a public that did not understand or want to understand the horrors servicemen had faced in combat.

FULL LETTER TRANSCRIPTION

EDWARD M. KENNEDY

MASSACHUSETTS

United States Senate

Washington, D.C. 20510

April 25, 1973

Mr. Thursby

Dear Mr. Thursby:

Thank you for taking the time to express your views on amnesty.

We all are relieved that the war is finally at an end and that the nation can turn its attention to reconciliation and healing the wounds and bitterness created by this long and costly conflict.

Our first task must be to provide security and comfort to the prisoners of war and to help restore them to American society. A like task lies ahead for the disabled veterans and those who became addicted to drugs while overseas. Some humanitarian relief also must be provided to the people of Southeast Asia in their struggle to rebuild a nation ravaged by war.

As part of this postwar adjustment, we must examine the question of how to treat those who refused induction by going underground or by leaving their country. During hearings held last year by the Senate Subcommittee on Administrative Practice and Procedure, the diversity of opinions was symbolized by the national commander of the American Legion in his statement against amnesty, and by the testimony of a young man who had completed a Federal prison sentence for refusing induction. This young man issued a strong plea for amnesty. There was a testimony by one father of a young soldier killed in Vietnam against amnesty. Yet another father of a soldier killed in Vietnam testified for unconditional amnesty. The same contradictory recommendations came in testimony from Vietnam veterans themselves.

In seeking to understand how best to proceed, I believe that our nation can look back at the [twenty-nine] instances of amnesty granted by Presidents in the past, including the unconditional amnesty after the Civil War. We often gain wisdom through learning what other men did at other times in our history. It seems that when the nation was most divided against itself, as it was after the Civil War, the end of hostilities was followed by the most sweeping amnesty in an effort to bind the wounds of war.

While the national interest requires reconciliation, there can be no amnesty for those who committed crimes and then deserted, nor for those whose motives had no relationship to the question of conscientious objection. For these, there only can be a return to face whatever judicial proceedings are demanded under the law.

For the others, these who out of deep belief, felt that they could not maim or kill another human being who was no threat to their lives or the security of their families, another judgment must be made. I believe that we may well examine the view of President Andrew Johnson when he granted at Christmas in 1868 a full pardon to all those who fought against the Union. He said that a “retaliatory or vindictive policy, attended by unnecessary disqualifications, pains, penalties” could only tend to hinder reconciliation among the people.

But the first and immediate task is to care for the addict, the jobless and the wounded veterans home from Southeast Asia. It is our nation’s responsibility to help them right now. And only after we can insure that they are given every opportunity to rebuild their lives, can we then seek the answers to amnesty with the ultimate goal of restoring to our country the unity which this long and cruel conflict divided.

Sincerely,

Edward M. Kennedy

Comprehension Questions

1. The text includes a letter by Senator Edward Kennedy in which he discusses the need to care for those who served in Southeast Asia. What else does it discuss the need to do? 

(written answer)

2. Explain at least two problems the United States faced after the Vietnam War. Use evidence from the text, including Edward M. Kennedy's letter, to support your answer.

Support your answer with evidence from the text. 

(written answer)

3. What is the main idea of this text? 

(written answer)

4. As used in Kennedy’s letter, what does the word “amnesty” mean?

Support your answer with evidence from the text. 

(written answer)