An international day of action against the American-led “war on terror” took place Saturday, Oct. 27. If you were unaware of this, rest assured you’re not the only one. In Toronto, a measly 1,500 people marched on the U.S. consulate.
Though the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are the least popular they have ever been, turnout at anti-war protests is dwindling and the peace movement is utterly failing to grab the attention of the North American public. The largest protests against the Iraq war occurred before the invasion, at a time when opposition to the war was only at 23 per cent. Every year since then, the crowds at demonstrations in both Canada and the U.S. have gotten smaller, despite growing opposition to the wars. What could possibly explain this startling inverse relationship?
Most analysts blame it on fatigue. As the war on terror stretches into its seventh year, so the story goes, those who oppose North American military action in the Middle East get tired of protesting. They burn out. But this analysis ignores what’s really at the core of “protest fatigue”— namely, that it has become painfully apparent to demonstrators that no one is listening.
The Canadian and American governments are completely out of step with the public about the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. The conflicts are tremendously unpopular in both countries, yet their respective governments seem not to care.
In direct opposition to public opinion, Stephen Harper used his throne speech last week to announce his intention to extend the Afghan mission until at least 2011, two years beyond our current commitment to NATO. George W. Bush seems similarly deaf to calls to pull U.S. troops out of Iraq. As support for the war continued to spiral downward earlier this year, Bush sent more soldiers overseas. With leaders in Ottawa and the White House blatantly ignoring the majority of their citizens on this vital issue, it’s no wonder protestors feel fatigued.
But the government’s deaf ear doesn’t fully explain the toothless nature of the peace movement. If people feel strongly enough about an issue, they will voice their opinion loudly, whether or not they are heeded.
What Americans and Canadians primarily object to is the loss of their own country’s soldiers. Most people now agree that it’s grossly unfair to ask our young men and women to die in a war for which the cause is vague, and victory ill-defined and uncertain.
This same concern for the youth of the nation was partly what galvanized anti-war protestors of the Vietnam era into unprecedented mass protests, especially when the draft was imposed. But the millions who shouted “Hey hey LBJ! How many kids did you kill today?” at President Lyndon Johnson were also deeply concerned about the innocent youth of the country they were at war with. This is not a widespread concern in America or Canada today. North Americans primarily see our soldiers, not foreign civilians, as the victims of these conflicts. This is reflected on the evening news, where tallies of Canadian and American dead are meticulously kept track of nightly, while the total number of Iraqis or Afghans killed since the invasions is almost never mentioned. This is a stunning omission, considering over 100,000 Iraqis have been killed since 2003. Within the first few months of the Afghan war, over 3,000 civilians were killed.
In the wake of 9/11, North Americans apparently have difficulty identifying with the plight of Muslims in the Middle East. Relatively few people have relatives or friends dying in Iraq and Afghanistan. As long as soldiers are depicted as the main casualties of war, the majority will object to the conflicts, but few will feel passionate enough to take to the streets. Until the peace movement convinces Canadians and Americans to stop the conflicts for the sake of those that it affects most, the protests will dwindle, and our leaders will continue beating the drums of war.
