Skip to main content

Minister of National Defence Harjit Sajjan listens to a translation during a news conference in Ottawa, on April 8, 2019.

Adrian Wyld/The Canadian Press

Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan says he will find out why his department’s websites pay tribute to every other Canadian mission except the 1994 deployment to Rwanda, where the horrors of a genocide left many troops with permanent psychological damage.

Mr. Sajjan’s promise to examine the gaps in the historical record about one of the most difficult deployments ever undertaken by Canada came Monday as politicians acknowledged the 25th anniversary of the massacre that claimed more than 800,000 lives.

Six hundred Canadian soldiers – signals experts, engineers, medical staff and members of the now-disbanded Canadian Airborne Regiment – were sent to the tiny African country in July, 1994, as the slaughter was ending but a civil war was still being waged. They were the among the first troops to arrive as part of a mission, known as UNAMIR II, that began with a United Nations Security Council resolution on June 8.

Story continues below advertisement

The Canadians patrolled streets lined with bodies under uncertain rules of engagement, helped children who had been orphaned and people who had been maimed, and faced down child soldiers armed with machine guns, while creating the communications and infrastructure that would allow Rwanda to heal and rebuild.

Today, more than half of Canada’s Rwanda veterans are receiving disability benefits related to post–traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) – more than double the rate for deployments to Afghanistan, Bosnia or Somalia.

But, the Department of Defence website, which lists all of the missions undertaken by Canada, does not mention theirs. The Veterans Affairs site says Canadians stayed on after the genocide to help with humanitarian efforts but it makes no reference to UNAMIR II and what was endured and accomplished.

And, while Australia has created a separate medal to acknowledge that its troops who were sent to Rwanda after the genocide faced brutal and “warlike” conditions, Canada has paid no similar tribute.

From the archives: 'Don't talk to me about justice'

Green Party Leader Elizabeth May rose during Question Period in the House of Commons on Monday to ask about the lack of recognition for Canada’s Rwanda veterans.

“Many Canadian military who served in Rwanda, particularly in the second phase of the mission, where it wasn’t a failure, where they did really solid work, go unrecognized on the Veterans Affairs website, unrecognized on the DND website,” Ms. May said. “They need a medal for that second phase of service as other governments have done for their veterans who have experienced the unbearable.”

Mr. Sajjan did not directly address Ms. May’s concerns in the House. But later, he said, “recognizing the service of people who have served, that is all our responsibility, so I am going to take a look at the wording of the website now that I have been made aware of it.”

Story continues below advertisement

As for a special medal, the minister said it would be up to Governor-General Julie Payette to decide whether one should be awarded. Ms. Payette is in Rwanda this week to mark the genocide and to demonstrate Canada’s commitment to preventing mass atrocities.

Sammy Sampson, a former corporal who in 1994 was part of a four-man team at Canadian outpost at the Rwandan border with Zaire, says many of the Rwandan veterans wish they could revisit the country this year to see the progress over the past quarter-century. It is a request they had when The Globe and Mail wrote about the issue in January.

It was difficult, said Mr. Sampson, for them to see the Governor-General go to Rwanda without bringing along any of the regular soldiers who helped put the country on the road to recovery.

Also difficult, Mr. Sampson said, is the fact that many veterans hid the psychological issues they were experiencing in the years after they returned home and, as a result, did not apply to the government for benefits until 2006. That means they fall under the New Veterans Charter, and not the old Pension Act, and are receiving less compensation than those who applied earlier.

But the key to moving forward is recognition, Mr. Sampson said. In the days and weeks after the Globe and Mail story ran in January, he said, he contacted Mr. Sajjan’s office as well as a number of senior military officers to provide them with the numerous documents he has collected about the UNAMIR II mission – information that at least could be used to update the government websites.

“So they have everything,” Mr. Sampson said. “And I asked them to please get back to me. And they haven’t.”

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Cannabis pro newsletter