|
Who
We Are
Articles
Upcoming
Events
Past
Events
Downloads
Links
No
Child Left Behind
Political
Cartoons
Contact
Us
|
Officer Faces Court-Martial for Refusing to Deploy to Iraq
JOHN KIFNER and TIMOTHY EGAN, New York Times
July 23, 2006
SEATTLE
— When First Lt. Ehren K. Watada of the Army shipped out for a
tour of duty in South Korea two years ago, he was a promising young
officer rated among the best by his superiors. Like many young men
after Sept. 11, he had volunteered “out of a desire to protect
our country,” he said, even paying $800 for a medical test to
prove he qualified despite childhood asthma.
Now Lieutenant Watada, 28, is working behind a desk at Fort Lewis just
south of Seattle, one of only a handful of Army officers who have
refused to serve in Iraq, an Army spokesman said, and apparently the
first facing the prospect of a court-martial for doing so.
“I was still willing to go until I started reading,” Lieutenant Watada said in an interview one recent evening.
A long and deliberate buildup led to Lieutenant Watada’s decision
to refuse deployment to Iraq. He reached out to antiwar groups, and
they, in turn, embraced his cause, raising money for his legal defense,
selling posters and T-shirts, and circulating a petition on his behalf.
Critics say the lieutenant’s move is an orchestrated act of
defiance that will cause chaos in the military if repeated by others.
But Lieutenant Watada said he arrived at his decision after much
soul-searching and research.
On Jan. 25, “with deep regret,” he delivered a passionate
two-page letter to his brigade commander, Col. Stephen J. Townsend,
asking to resign his commission. “Simply put, I am wholeheartedly
opposed to the continued war in Iraq, the deception used to wage this
war, and the lawlessness that has pervaded every aspect of our civilian
leadership,” Lieutenant Watada wrote.
At 2:30 a.m. on June 22, when the Third Stryker Brigade of the Second
Infantry Division set off for Iraq, Lieutenant Watada was not on the
plane. He has since been charged under the Uniform Code of Military
Justice with one count of missing movement, for not deploying, two
counts of contempt toward officials and three counts of conduct
unbecoming an officer.
Lieutenant Watada’s about-face came as a shock to his parents,
his fellow soldiers and his superiors. In retrospect, though, there may
have been one ominous note in the praise heaped on him in his various
military fitness reports: he was cited as having an “insatiable
appetite for knowledge.”
Lieutenant Watada said that when he reported to Fort Lewis in June
2005, in preparation for deployment to Iraq, he was beginning to have
doubts. “I was still prepared to go, still willing to go to
Iraq,” he said. “I thought it was my responsibility to
learn about the present situation. At that time, I never conceived our
government would deceive the Army or deceive the people.”
He was not asking for leave as a conscientious objector, Lieutenant
Watada said, a status assigned to those who oppose all military service
because of moral objections to war. It was only the Iraq war that he
said he opposed.
Military historians say it is rare in the era of the all-voluntary Army for officers to do what Lieutenant Watada has done.
“Certainly it’s far from unusual in the annals of war for
this to happen,” said Michael E. O’Hanlon, a senior fellow
in military affairs at the Brookings Institution. “But it is
pretty obscure since the draft ended.”
Mr. O’Hanlon said that if other officers followed suit, it would
be nearly impossible to run the military. “The idea that any
individual officer can decide which war to fight doesn’t really
pass the common-sense test,” he said.
Lieutenant Watada conceded that the military could not function if
individual members decided which war was just. But, he wrote to Colonel
Townsend, he owed his allegiance to a “higher power”
— the Constitution — based on the values the Army had
taught him: “loyalty, duty, respect, selfless service, honor,
integrity and personal courage.”
“Please allow me to leave the Army with honor and dignity,” he concluded.
Lieutenant Watada said he began his self-tutorial about the Iraq war
with James Bamford’s book “A Pretext for War,” which
argues that the war in Iraq was driven by a small group of
neoconservative civilians in the Pentagon and their allies in policy
institutes. The book suggests that intelligence was twisted to justify
the toppling of Saddam Hussein, with the goal of fundamentally changing
the Middle East to the benefit of Israel.
Next was “Chain of Command,” by Seymour M. Hersh, about the
Abu Ghraib prison scandal. After that, Lieutenant Watada moved on to
other publications on war-related themes, including selections on the
treatment of prisoners at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, and the
so-called Downing Street memo, in which the British chief of
intelligence told Prime Minister Tony Blair in July 2002 that the
Americans saw war in Iraq as “inevitable” and that
“the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the
policy.”
Lieutenant Watada said he also talked to soldiers returning to Fort
Lewis from Iraq, including a staff sergeant who told him that he and
his men had probably committed war crimes.
“When I learned the awful truth that we had been deceived —
I was shocked and disgusted,” he wrote in the letter to his
brigade commander.
There were efforts to work things out, Lieutenant Watada said. The Army
offered him a staff job in Iraq that would have kept him out of combat;
but combat was not the point, he said.
Lieutenant Watada said he had volunteered to serve in Afghanistan,
which he regarded as an unambiguous war linked to the Sept. 11 attacks.
The request was denied.
In public statements, Army officials warned Lieutenant Watada that he
was facing “adverse action” in the days leading up to his
decision to refuse to go to Iraq. Charges were filed only after he
showed insubordination, they said; his insubordination included giving
interviews.
“This was a call of his commander, after he decided that
Lieutenant Watada’s action required these charges,” said
Joe Hitt, a Fort Lewis spokesman.
When Lieutenant Watada’s mother, Carolyn Ho, learned of his
decision, she was caught off guard, she said. Her son, an Eagle Scout
who grew up in Hawaii, had always admired the Army.
“I tried to talk him out of it,” Ms. Ho said. “I just
saw his career going down the drain. It took me awhile to get through
this.”
Now, she said, “I honor and respect his decision.”
Two officers who served with Lieutenant Watada in South Korea also
voiced support for him in telephone interviews arranged by Lieutenant
Watada, though they made it clear they did not share his views on Iraq.
“He was a good officer, always very professional,” said one
of the officers, Capt. Scott Hulin. “I personally disagree with
his opinion and his stance against the war. But I personally support
his stand as a man, to be able to do what his heart is telling
him.”
A former roommate of Lieutenant Watada, First Lt. Bernard West, offered similar remarks.
Lieutenant Watada had two assignments in South Korea. One was as the
executive officer of the headquarters battery, the other as a platoon
leader of a unit of multiple-launch rockets. His evaluations were
glowing.
“Exemplary,” said his executive officer fitness report,
which Lieutenant Watada provided to a reporter. “Tremendous
potential for positions of increased responsibility. He has the
potential to command with distinction. Promote ahead of his
peers.”
His evaluation as a platoon leader also called him “exemplary” and said he had “unlimited potential.”
Under the military system, the charges against Lieutenant Watada will
be reviewed in an Article 32 hearing, the rough equivalent of a grand
jury hearing. If there is a court-martial hearing, it will probably
come in the fall; the maximum penalty would be a dishonorable
discharge, forfeiture of pay and seven years in prison, according to a
news release from Fort Lewis.
A spokesman for the Army, Paul Boyce, said that as far as he knew,
Lieutenant Watada would be the first Army officer to be court-martialed
for refusing to go to Iraq.
This archive consists of a topically organized selection of
articles culled by members of the Counter-Recruitment List Serve from printed
publications and web sites. The archive is not complete. We have chosen
material relevant to the work of Eugene,
Oregon’s Committee for Countering
Military Recruitment that we think may be of use to others individuals and
groups with similar goals.
Because our web site is public, personal comments about the
articles and (frequent) corrections of reporters’ errors are also not included.
If an article interests you, we encourage you to return to the
Counter-Recruitment List Serve and put the article’s headline into the search
line, which should bring up (often wise and useful) commentary and corrections.
If you do not belong to the List Serve, it can be found at counter-recruitment@yahoogroups.com
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the articles
on this site are posted without profit to those who have expressed prior
interest in receiving the included information for research and educational
purposed.
|