Download PDF of this full issue: v17n3.pdf (13.7 MB)

Facing Reality: POWs - MIAs

By Barry Romo

The MIA/POW question is an emotional one for many Americans. Families who have a loved one missing long to have the issue resolved with the return of at least a body. Some widows, orphans and parents hope beyond that somehow their loved one did not die and will return.

Others are tied not so much emotionally as financially to the issue. To a few the MIA issue is the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. They collect money, make wild claims, insinuate unverifiable journeys into the jungles, go on TV with stern faces and somber accusations. When it comes down to results, these Rambo's come up short—even shorter than Stallone. But, by playing on the genuine fears, misery and hopes of the families, they can turn a buck claiming that POW's are still being held (if not in Vietnam, then certainly in Laos).

The rightwing has found a political pot of gold (although they are not above making a couple of bucks on the issue either). By reciting racial stereotypes about "inscrutable orientals with no respect for human life" these toads can gain a few followers. By fostering lies about live POW's they can sabotage normal relations with Vietnam.

The Reagan Administration uses the issue to continue an embargo on trade (among other things) thereby stopping the flow of commerce but also stopping medical supplies desperately needed to help the numbers of Vietnamese babies and children affected by Agent Orange.

Reagan and Co also use the MIA/POW issue to continue to vote to keep the Pol Pot regime in the UN representing Kampuchea, and to continue to give aid to the murderous butcher responsible for the deaths of fully 1/3 of his own people.

The Vietnamese flatly stated that there are no live Americans left in Vietnam. We asked about Robert Garwood, the convicted Marine turncoat, and were told that he had been the last—and they wish he had left sooner than he did.

Politically, it is beyond reason to think that if in fact, the Reagan Administration had any proof whatever about American servicemen still being held in Indochina, that he would not go on TV to tell all. Think of it: the "Great Communicator" on TV looking into the camera showing us proof of POW's in Indochina. Irangate would fade. North could lead the charge and the nation would unite behind our president! The presidency is saved!! But there is not such proof to save Reagan or his cohorts, so we're in the Persian Gulf instead of the Gulf of Tonkin.

The question of MIA's and the bodies of the dead is a different matter. Certainly, the Vietnamese understand as well as anyone the natural desire of families to be able to bury their dead. But the issue is a whole lot more difficult than simply turning over bodies of American servicemen who were killed in Vietnam (mostly in North Vietnam).

Physically, locating the remains of the bodies crashed in the jungle 12, 15 or 20 years ago is an awesome task. National Geographic did a story on a dig in Laos and compared it to a major archaeological search costing some $30,000. And this is in a country where the average yearly wage is $600. Quite simply, the jungle consumes bodies, whether animal or human.

We asked the Vietnamese about the search for remains; it is not an easy job, we were told. Many of the areas where remains might be found are remote, these are the areas which were most heavily bombed during the war, and therefore the local populace is not disposed to look for American bodies. Government officials stated that they wished they could turn over the bodies both for simple humanitarian reasons and to remove that stumbling block to normal diplomatic relations. But they found it extremely difficult to explain to their own people why they should devote time and money to searching for the 1200 American remains where there were over 100,000 Vietnamese MIAs—what was their government doing to find their own sons and daughters?

How personally the issue affected many Vietnamese was made clear to us by our friend and guid, Mr Nguyen Hong Quang, who told us (after we had heard about the problems from government officials) that his own brother had been missing since the 1969 Tet offensive where he had been a sapper in Saigon and disappeared in combat. He also told us of leading a delegation from the Australian government to look for the remains of Australian MIA's. The province chief would not look for—or have people take time to look for—old bones.

The chief's reluctance was made clear when he told of being a guerrilla fighter during the war; his wife served as a courier. She was captured, executed and left in the road by the same Australian unit for whose remains they were now searching. The Australians set up an ambush to kill those who came for the body, but no one came because the Vietnamese knew of the ambush. After a week the Australians left. But by then the body of the chief's wife had been eaten by dogs and other animals.

Mr Quang said he had to argue about the importance of Australia to Vietnam, and to ask the chief to put the war behind him. The province chief did and even personally welcomed the Australians, but the story points out that central government directions are not always followed locally. An old Vietnamese saying says, "The Emperor's authority stops at the village gate."

And on this issue at least it is not difficult to understand. How many confederate soldiers would have gone looking for the Yankee bones 15 years after the Civil War? Or Jews for the bodies of the Germans after World War II? Or, for that matter, how many Americans would look for the bodies of Vietnamese missing today?

The government of Vietnam is looking. But the real answer lies in normalization of relations. That is the first real step. Second, people have to realize, as difficult as it may be, that in war, guns, grenades, bombs, napalm, white phosphorus, and jet fuel shred, rip and destroy bodies. Many of those who are missing will never be found or accounted for. That is a fact of life—a fact of war.

—Barry Romo
VVAW National Office