KEY POINTS:
If any politician was in a position to deliver a compelling and eloquent personal apology to the Vietnam soldiers it is our Prime Minister.
But instead of drawing on her own rich insights into why this group of New Zealand soldiers was so shamefully treated and for so long, Helen Clark delivered the bland words of a Crown statement.
"The Crown extends to New Zealand Vietnam veterans and their families an apology for the manner in which their loyal service in the name of New Zealand was not recognised as it should have been, when it should have been, and for inadequate support extended to them and their families after their return home from the conflict."
As an apology goes, Clark's statement on behalf of the Crown was professional. She acknowledged the "dedicated service" of Kiwi soldiers sent to Vietnam in the late 1960s, noting they "loyally served at the direction of the Government of the day, having left their homes against a background of unprecedented divisions and controversy over whether or not New Zealand should participate in the war".
Clark recorded that on all sides strong views were held with conviction.
"My own party, the New Zealand Labour Party, opposed New Zealand involvement in the war, and acted immediately to withdraw the troops on election to office in 1972."
But as the Yeats quotation goes, the apology "lacked all conviction" - the Prime Minister did not use the word "sorry".
I had hoped that Clark - a student leader of the Vietnam protest movement herself - could have injected a personal note with some honest reflection on the role our protesting generation played in the shameful treatment which we also awarded to the returning soldiers who we taunted with allegations that they were "baby murderers" or worse.
Our generation, probably the most cosseted and protected in New Zealand's short history, does not know the privations of war. Our fathers tended to keep their war stories for the RSA, not share with us the horrors which so affected many of them.
There were no Kiwi conscripts and, unlike the United States, our young men did not face the draft.
The New Zealand soldiers who went to Vietnam were volunteers - a factor we used to damn them for, for taking part in what we saw as an immoral, unjust war.
We overlooked the fact that if the volunteers had not gone the Holyoake Government would have made up the numbers somehow as it sought to answer the then Prime Minister's question, "Whose will is to prevail in South Vietnam, the imposed will of the North Vietnamese communists and their agents, or the freely expressed will of the people of South Vietnam?"
New Zealand's contribution was minimalist, a token to preserve relations with the US.
But the brute reality is that the atrocities did not finish with the withdrawal of US troops. Hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese fled after the communist victory in the north. In neighbouring Cambodia, as Pol Pot executed millions of his countrymen, we did nothing.
The outcome was not as black and white as hoped for at the time we took to the streets in our hundreds to protest against visiting US Vice-President Spiro Agnew outside the Intercontinental Hotel in Auckland in January 1970.
Or in the case of the radical fringe, who mounted bombing attacks against New Zealand military and conservative establishments.
This rich history would have provided Clark with an incredible amount of material to contextualise why Norman Kirk's incoming Labour Government did not acknowledge the contributions of the few remaining Kiwi soldiers after he ordered them back from Vietnam.
I couldn't help reflecting on Kevin Rudd's apology to the stolen generations, where he talked about the terribly primal quality of the personal stories by the affected Aborigines.
In Rudd's words these people were human beings who have been damaged deeply by the decisions of governments and parliaments.
There is still time for Clark to add that little bit extra extra to show that our Prime Minister empathises with the human effect on the soldiers and their families during the rest of the formal tributes that will take place this weekend.
The reality is that the Crown apology would not have occurred unless a parliamentary select committee had had the courage to take an honest look at the terrible damage to the health of many of the Kiwi soldiers who were sprayed by the defoliant Agent Orange while serving in Vietnam.
The committee did not ignore the evidence produced by John Masters and others, which undercut previous reports that suggested New Zealand soldiers were not in the spraying zones.
Clark's Government has since announced a $30 million compensation package to help those suffering from the appalling effects of Agent Orange on themselves and their families.
This amount is not huge and does not cover all classes of damage. But it is finally recognition.
