Book Reviews | Gordon Campbell | News Flashes | Scoop Features | Scoop Video | Strange & Bizarre | Search

 


Sarah Olson: Lieutenant Watada Faces New Charges

Lieutenant Watada Faces New Charges


By Sarah Olson
t r u t h o u t | Report
From: http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/091806A.shtml

Monday 18 September 2006

US Army First Lieutenant Ehren Watada, the first officer to publicly refuse to deploy to Iraq, faces one new charge, the Army announced Friday. The additional charge, of conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentlemen, centers on Lieutenant Watada's statement that "to stop an illegal and unjust war, soldiers can choose to stop fighting it." Lieutenant Watada made the comments during a public address to the annual Veterans for Peace convention held in Seattle, Washington, in mid-August.

In response to the additional charge, Lieutenant Watada stated: "As I've said in the past, my only intent is to impress upon all service members that their duty is to fully evaluate the truth and lawfulness behind every order - including the one to participate in a war. We each have a civic and moral responsibility to make the right choices regardless of the consequences."

Eric Seitz is Lieutenant Watada's civilian attorney. He called the additional charge an obvious attempt to silence his client. "His commander told him when they brought him in, if you continue to speak, we'll continue to add charges," said Seitz. "He's not doing anything other than saying things he believes to be true, and that we believe are true. This makes it that much clearer that this is just a political prosecution, and that's really all this case has been about from the beginning."

The Army did not immediately return requests for comment, but in a summation of the Article 32 hearing conducted in August, Lieutenant Colonel Mark Keith concluded that while he believed Lieutenant Watada was "sincere" in his beliefs, his "contempt for the President and suggestion that US soldiers can stop the war simply by refusing to fight borders on mutiny and sedition." While Lieutenant Colonel Keith agreed that officers must disobey illegal orders, he did not find it wise for officers to attempt to navigate the complexity of international law, and should rely upon "official interpretation" of such orders unless "definitively illegal."

A final decision on charging Lieutenant Watada is expected from Lieutenant General James Dubik within several weeks. If the Army proceeds with all charges now filed against the lieutenant, he faces up to eight and a half years in prison.

Iraq Veterans Against the War member Maricela Guzman was at the Veterans for Peace convention and heard Lieutenant Watada speak. She says she still finds it hard to describe the emotions she experienced. "Enlisted soldiers and officers, they are a different breed in the military," she says. "To have an officer come out and resist the war, and support other resisters, was a very emotional moment for me. I was very proud of what was going on that evening." Guzman says the Army is clearly trying to make an example out of Lieutenant Watada.

Kelly Dougherty is the chairperson of Iraq Veterans Against the War and agrees the Army is attempting to silence Lieutenant Watada with their aggressive prosecution. "The charge is unwarranted. They are trying to show others how hard they will be punished if they speak out. Right now the military sees more and more soldiers speaking publicly and it's threatening to them. They are creating an atmosphere of threats and of fear." Dougherty says Iraq Veterans Against the War will continue to give Lieutenant Watada and all war resisters their full support.

On June 7th, Lieutenant Watada became the first enlisted officer to announce publicly that he opposed the Iraq war on moral and legal grounds. At a press conference, he said: "It is my conclusion as an officer of the Armed Forces that the war in Iraq is not only morally wrong but a horrible breach of American law." He continued: "The war in Iraq violates our democratic system of checks and balances. It usurps international treaties and conventions that by virtue of the Constitution become American law. The wholesale slaughter and mistreatment of the Iraqi people with only limited accountability is not only a terrible moral injustice, but a contradiction to the Army's own Law of Land Warfare. My participation would make me party to war crimes." 15 days later, on June 22nd, Lieutenant Watada was given an order to deploy to Iraq, and he refused.

For refusing to deploy to Iraq, Lieutenant Watada was charged, on July 5th, with violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 87, missing movement by design. It's a charge that normally brings with it prison time of up to 2 years. For speaking publicly against the Iraq war, Lieutenant Watada has been confronted with a barrage of charges: initially three, now four violations of Article 133 - conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman - and two violations of Article 88 - speaking contemptuously against officials.

At the heart of Lieutenant Watada's pending court-martial is whether an officer in the United States Army has the right to speak against orders he believes to be illegal and a war he believes both immoral and illegal.

In a friend of the court brief filed in Lieutenant Watada's Article 32 hearing, the American Civil Liberties Union writes: "If the charges leveled in this case are allowed to proceed, it would mean that service members are completely barred from voicing their honest opinions on political subjects of significant public concern. Silencing speech like Lieutenant Watada's violates the Constitution while it also harms the military and the public at large." The ACLU brief goes on to conclude that speech limitations applied to members of the military deserve - and historically have received - the narrowest possible interpretation. "Given how strongly the First Amendment protects statements like Lieutenant Watada's, the government must demonstrate extraordinary justification before it can eliminate that protection within the military justice system."

"In Lieutenant Watada's case," the ACLU argues, "the question is whether it is somehow reprehensible to express serious legal and moral opinions about matters of undeniable public importance. It is not. The Founders themselves knew that it was the highest calling of a gentleman to be fully engaged in the political life of one's country. Far from being a sign of moral unfitness, such statements indicate a highly developed moral sense. Lieutenant Watada's statements indicate that he was attempting to fulfill his legal and moral obligations as an officer, not that he was pursuing selfish pleasures for their own sake."

Lieutenant Watada was, from the outset, a patriotic and idealistic young man, deeply moved by the attacks of September 11th. Like many, he says, he felt compelled to give something back to this country. "I took an oath to the US Constitution, and to the values and the principles it represents. It makes us strongly unique. We don't allow tyranny; we believe in accountability and checks and balances, and a government that's by and for the people."

And when he was told he would be deploying to Iraq, Lieutenant Watada began to educate himself on the war, so he could most effectively train and command the soldiers reporting to him. He says as he began to read about the Iraq war - and the foreign and domestic policy that brought us to the war - he began to question and to doubt. " I started asking, why are we dying? Why are we losing limbs? For what?"

And the more he learned the more his doubts overwhelmed him. "The deciding moment for me was in January of 2006. I had watched clips of military funerals. I saw the photos of these families. The children. The mothers and the fathers as they sat by the grave, or as they came out of the funerals. One really hard picture for me was a little boy leaving his father's funeral. He couldn't face the camera so he is covering his eyes. I felt like I couldn't watch that anymore. I couldn't be silent any more and condone something that I felt was deeply wrong."

Lieutenant Watada had a sense that he was doing something that was bigger than just his own immediate actions: to him, this represented a deep moral obligation. "It's not about just trying to survive. It's not about just trying to make sure you're safe. When you are looking your children in the eye in the future, or when you are at the end of your life, you want to look back on your life and know that at a very important moment, when I had the opportunity to make the right decisions, I did so, even knowing there were negative consequences."

For now, Lieutenant Watada is in a holding pattern, waiting for the military to convene a court-martial. Friends and Family of Lieutenant Watada are planning a series of events and demonstrations leading up to the Lieutenant's prosecution. The court-martial may take place some time in December, and organizers are planning demonstrations at Ft. Lewis, and around the country.

Stay up to date about Lieutenant Watada's case at www.thankyoult.org.

*************

Sarah Olson is an independent radio producer and journalist based in Oakland, California. She can be reached at solson75@yahoo.com.

© Scoop Media

 
 
 
 
 
Top Scoops Headlines

 

Werewolf: Living With Rio’s Olympic Ruins

Mariana Cavalcanti Critics of the Olympic project can point a discernible pattern in the delivery of Olympics-related urban interventions: the belated but rushed inaugurations of faulty and/or unfinished infrastructures... More>>

Live Blog On Now: Open Source//Open Society Conference

The second annual Open Source Open Society Conference is a 2 day event taking place on 22-23 August 2016 at Michael Fowler Centre in Wellington… Scoop is hosting a live blog summarising the key points of this exciting conference. More>>

ALSO:

Buildup:

Gordon Campbell: On The Politicising Of The War On Drugs In Sport

It hasn’t been much fun at all to see how “war on drugs in sport” has become a proxy version of the Cold War, fixated on Russia. This weekend’s banning of the Russian long jumper Darya Klishina took that fixation to fresh extremes. More>>

ALSO:

Binoy Kampmark: Kevin Rudd’s Failed UN Secretary General Bid

Few sights are sadder in international diplomacy than seeing an aging figure desperate for honours. In a desperate effort to net them, he scurries around, cultivating, prodding, wishing to be noted. Finally, such an honour is netted, in all likelihood just to shut that overly keen individual up. More>>

Open Source / Open Society: The Scoop Foundation - An Open Model For NZ Media

Access to accurate, relevant and timely information is a crucial aspect of an open and transparent society. However, in our digital society information is in a state of flux with every aspect of its creation, delivery and consumption undergoing profound redefinition... More>>

Keeping Out The Vote: Gordon Campbell On The US Elections

I’ll focus here on just two ways that dis-enfranchisement is currently occurring in the US: (a) by the rigging of the boundary lines for voter districts and (b) by demanding elaborate photo IDs before people are allowed to cast their vote. More>>

Ramzy Baroud: Being Black Palestinian - Solidarity As A Welcome Pathology

It should come as no surprise that the loudest international solidarity that accompanied the continued spate of the killing of Black Americans comes from Palestine; that books have already been written and published by Palestinians about the plight of their Black brethren. In fact, that solidarity is mutual. More>>

ALSO:


Get More From Scoop

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Top Scoops
Search Scoop  
 
 
Powered by Vodafone
NZ independent news