A Mother Fights for a Soldier Who Said No to War

Also see below:
Kevin Sites | Ehren Watada: Conscientious Rejector? [

A Mother Fights for a Soldier Who Said No to War
By Linton Weeks
The Washington Post

Thursday 04 January 2007

Carolyn Ho is a mother on a mission.

She came to Washington in mid-December to build support for her son, Army 1st Lt. Ehren Watada, the first commissioned officer to refuse deployment to Iraq.

Barring some kind of miracle, he will be court-martialed on Feb. 5 at Fort Lewis, about 45 miles south of Seattle. If convicted, he could be sent to military prison for six years. There’s going to be a pretrial hearing today.

Like many Americans, she believed she could come to the capital city and change the world. Or at least her small part of it.

She was acting purely on instinct, wanting to do everything in a mother’s power to protect her son. “I’m here to get what I can,” said Ho, who is from Honolulu. Dark hair pulled back. Dark eyes that moisten when she speaks of her son. Soft voice. “I’m going to put it out there.”

At the very least, she hoped for some kind of letter of support before today’s hearing. Late yesterday afternoon, a letter arrived. After a lot of worry and work.

Lobbying Congress is no day at the spa.

During her Capitol Hill quest, she was accompanied by several seasoned lobbyists, but they let her do the talking. She moved along the halls, sitting down with staffers in the offices of Sens. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) and Daniel Akaka (D-Hawaii) and aides from the offices of Reps. Lynn Woolsey (D-Calif.), John Conyers (D-Mich.) and Maxine Waters (D-Calif.).

In closed-door meetings, Ho told the same story. She sees her efforts as part of a larger, multifaceted wave that is challenging the Bush administration from every angle. At the same time the president is advocating an increase in the number of soldiers in Iraq, there is on the home front an increase in the number of vocal opponents of the war. “I believe my son is part of this movement,” Ho said.

Phoebe Jones of Global Women’s Strike, an international antiwar network that supports Ho and Watada, was at Ho’s side on Capitol Hill. “The work of mothers is protecting life, beginning with their children,” Jones explained. “And that is really the opposite of the obscenity of war.”

On the Hill, Ho handed out information packets. She passed around photos of Watada, who is taller, fuller of face than his mother, but shares her smile.

Her son “based his decision on facts,” she said. He studied the war in Iraq and decided it was illegal. He tried to resign and leave the service with dignity, but the Army wouldn’t let him. He asked to be shipped to Afghanistan; his request was denied. He was offered a noncombat position in Iraq; he said no thanks.

Because the United States entered the war based on false premises, Ho said, the war is illegal. It is thus her son’s constitutional duty to disobey orders.

So she asked that members of Congress get involved. She said that ideally she would prefer that the military accept her son’s resignation and dismiss all charges against him. “He shouldn’t be in a military prison,” she said. His voice “will be totally squelched.”

She asked, “Just who is the criminal here? The one who is refusing to participate in war crimes?”

From the Army’s standpoint, the case is simple. Tens of thousands of soldiers have passed through Fort Lewis on their way to the war and have not asked for special treatment, said Army spokesman Joe Piek. Watada, 28, signed on for military service in 2003 with full knowledge that he might have to fight an unpopular war, Piek said. “This is a case about a soldier who refused orders to deploy to Iraq…. That is the bottom line.”

Watada has been charged with one count of “missing movement,” which means he did not board one of the planes that were taking his 3rd Brigade to Kuwait on June 22. In Kuwait the brigade’s 4,000 soldiers received their equipment and their marching orders.

He also is charged with “conduct unbecoming an officer,” for subsequent statements he made. For now he is assigned to a special troops battalion and has been doing everyday soldierly duties while awaiting his court appearance.

Piek said, “He joined the Army and swore an oath, and that includes following the orders of the officers appointed over him. His unit was placed in a stop-loss category, which meant that everybody currently in that unit would deploy. You don’t get to pick and choose, especially if you are a junior officer, which places you get to go to.”

To Watada’s attorney, Eric Seitz, the situation is more complicated. “The United States talks out of both sides of its mouth,” he said. “We’ve prosecuted soldiers in other countries for following orders to commit war crimes. But God forbid you should use that refusal as a defense in this country.”

The Watada defense: Questioning the war publicly is not “conduct unbecoming” but an exercise of freedom of speech. And he had the right to miss movement because he was refusing to participate in what he deems an illicit enterprise.

To Carolyn Ho, congressional staffers were polite and receptive. She came at an inopportune time, she was told several times. Congress had adjourned for the holidays and there was not much time before the court-martial.

There were flashes of hope: Along the way, someone suggested that a “sign-on letter” sent by members of Congress to the secretary of the Army might be a way to galvanize support for Watada. Or a “dear colleague” letter that would alert others in Congress to Watada’s situation. One staffer brought up the idea of a “private resolution,” an arcane move in which Congress passes a bill that affects one person. “Those are possibilities,” Ho said. But as the day wore on, fatigue showed on her face.

She left with little more than encouragement and good wishes. A high school counselor, Ho had been on leave since the end of September. She had to get back to work.

She is divorced. Her ex-husband, Bob Watada, has also been out drumming up support, speaking to churches and civic organizations around the country. She spent October and November on the West Coast and much of December on the East. At one event she shared a podium with Cindy Sheehan, who refers to the moms-against-bombs instinct as “matriotism.”

Ho went back to Hawaii for Christmas, but is in the Seattle area this week for the hearing.

On the phone from Fort Lewis, Ehren Watada explained how he decided while still in college – in the aftermath of 9/11 – that he wanted to serve his country in the military. He walked into a recruitment office in Honolulu and said he wanted to go to officer candidate school. He failed the physical because of childhood asthma. “I was heartbroken,” he said. “I paid out of pocket for a breathing test to prove I had no breathing problems. I passed the test with flying colors and was eventually accepted at the end of March 2003.”

Though Watada’s father did not serve in the military, several uncles were in World War II. One of his uncles was killed in Korea. Another relative was in Vietnam. “There is a history of service in our family,” he said.

When he signed up, “I didn’t know the things I know today. I believed the military and the government when they told me that Iraq posed an imminent threat.”

Watada said it took him a couple of years to realize that the United States should not be in Iraq. He submitted his resignation in January 2006. “The commanders of my unit were not too happy about it,” he said. They were surprised, he said, because until that point he had received positive evaluations.

“I can’t stop the war,” said Watada. “But if Americans believe the war is wrong, they should be doing everything they can to stop it.”

His mother is doing what she can. “People are stepping gingerly,” she said yesterday about legislative action. “There’s a wait-and-see approach.”

She was in Tacoma, Wash., yesterday for a press conference when she received a personal letter from Rep. Maxine Waters. Ho read an excerpt over the phone:

“The issue that [1st Lt. Ehren Watada] has raised deserves to be publicly debated and considered. And I will use my platform as a member of Congress and chair of the ‘Out of Iraq’ caucus to highlight the failed policies of this administration and stimulate discussion…. Your son has shown great integrity and dignity in his objection to the war in Iraq, and I commend you for working so hard on his behalf.”

Ho sighed and said she found the letter to be “disappointing.”

But it was something.

---

Go to Original

Conscientious Rejector?
By Kevin Sites
Yahoo News Hot Zone

Tuesday 02 January 2007

First Lieutenant Ehren Watada still refuses Iraq deployment orders, calling the war illegal. A six-year prison term could result. Preliminary hearings are set for Thursday.

First Lt. Ehren Watada, a 28-year-old Hawaii native, is the first commissioned officer in the U.S. to publicly refuse deployment to
Iraq. He announced last June his decision not to deploy on the grounds the war is illegal.

Lt. Watada was based at Fort Lewis, Washington, with the Army’s 3rd (Stryker) Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division. He has remained on base, thus avoiding charges of desertion.

He does, however, face one count of “missing troop movement” and four counts of “conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman.” If convicted, he faces up to six years in prison.

Watada’s court martial is on February 5. A pre-trial hearing is set for January 4, with an added scope of controversy: the Army has ordered two freelance journalists, Sarah Olson and Dahr Jamail, to testify against Lt. Watada at the hearing. Both journalists are fighting the subpoenas.

Kevin Sites recently spoke with Lt. Watada about the reasoning behind his decision, the controversy the decision has caused and how he is dealing with the repercussions.

Lt. Watada spoke on the phone from his family’s home in Hawaii. Click here to listen to the full audio version of the conversation. A transcript of the interview follows.

Kevin Sites: Now, you joined the Army right after the US was invading Iraq and now you’re refusing to go. Some critics might look at this as somewhat disingenuous. You’ve taken an oath, received training but now you won’t fight. Can you explain your rationale behind this?

Ehren Watada: Sure. I think that in March of 2003 when I joined up, I, like many Americans, believed the administration when they said the threat from Iraq was imminent – that there were weapons of mass destruction all throughout Iraq; that there were stockpiles of it; and because of
Saddam Hussein’s ties to al-Qaeda and the 9/11 terrorist acts, the threat was imminent and we needed to invade that country immediately in order to neutralize that threat.

Since then I think I, as many, many Americans are realizing, that those justifications were intentionally falsified in order to fit a policy established long before 9/11 of just toppling the Saddam Hussein regime and setting up an American presence in Iraq.

Sites: Tell me how those views evolved. How did you come to that conclusion?

Watada: I think the facts are out there, they’re not difficult to find, they just take a little bit of willingness and interest on behalf of anyone who is willing to seek out the truth and find the facts. All of it is in the mainstream media. But it is quickly buried and it is quickly hidden by other events that come and go. And all it takes is a little bit of logical reasoning. The Iraq Survey Group came out and said there were no weapons of mass destruction after 1991 and during 2003. The 9/11 Commission came out and said there were no ties with Iraq to 9/11 or al-Qaeda. The president himself came out and said that nobody in his administration ever suggested that there was a link.

And yet those ties to al-Qaeda and the weapons of mass destruction were strongly suggested. They said there was no doubt there were weapons of mass destruction all throughout 2002, 2003 and even 2004. So, they came out and they say this, and yet they say it was bad intelligence, not manipulated intelligence, that was the problem. And then you have veteran members of the
CIA that come out and say, “No. It was manipulated intelligence. We told them there was no WMD. We told them there were no ties to al-Qaeda. And they said that that’s not what they wanted to hear.”

Sites: Do you think that you could have determined some of this information prior to joining the military – if a lot of it, as you say, was out there? There were questions going into the war whether WMD existed or not, and you seemingly accepted the administration’s explanation for that. Why did you do that at that point?

Watada: Certainly yeah, there was other information out there that I could have sought out. But I put my trust in our leaders in government.

Sites: Was there a turning point for you when you actually decided that this was definitely an illegal war?

Watada: Certainly. I think that when we take an oath we, as soldiers and officers, swear to protect the constitution – with our lives as necessary – and those constitutional values and laws that make us free and make us a democracy. And when we have one branch of government that intentionally deceives another branch of government in order to authorize war, and intentionally deceives the people in order to gain that public support, that is a grave breach of our constitutional values, our laws, our checks and balances, and separation of power.

Sites: But Lieutenant, was there one specific incident that happened in Iraq or that the administration had said or done at a certain period that [made you say] “I have to examine this more closely”?

Watada: No, I think that certainly as the war went on, and it was not going well, doubts came up in my mind, but at that point I still was willing to go. At one point I even volunteered to go to Iraq with any unit that was short of junior officers.

Sites: At what point was that?

Watada: This was in September of 2005. But as soon as I found out, and as I began to read and research more and more that the administration had intentionally deceived the public and Congress over the reasons for going to Iraq, that’s when I told myself “there’s something wrong here.”

“I saw the pain and agony etched upon the faces of all these families of lost soldiers. And I told myself that this needs to stop.”- Lt. Ehren Watada

Sites: Was there any kind of personal conviction as well, I mean in terms of exposure to returning soldiers or Marines – the kinds of wounds they suffered, the kinds of stories that they were bringing back with them – did that have any kind of influence or create any factors for you in coming to this decision?

Watada: Sure, I felt, well, in a general sense I felt that when we put our trust in the government, when we put our lives in their hands, that is a huge responsibility. And we also say that “when we put our lives in your hands, we ask that you not abuse that trust; that you not take us to war over flimsy or false reasons; that you take us to war when it is absolutely necessary.” Because we have so much to lose, you know – the soldiers, our lives, our limbs, our minds and our families – that the government and the people owe that to us.

Sites: Was there a fear that played into that? Did you see returning soldiers with lost limbs? Was there a concern for you that you might lose your life going to Iraq?

Watada: No, that had nothing to do with the issue. The issue here is that we have thousands of soldiers returning. And what is their sacrifice for? For terrorism or establishing democracy or whatever the other reasons are. And I saw the pain and agony etched upon the faces of all these families of lost soldiers. And I told myself that this needs to stop. We cannot have people in power that are irresponsible and corrupt and that keep on going that way because they’re not held accountable to the people.

Sites: You know on that note, Lieutenant, let me read you something from a speech that you gave in August to the Veterans for Peace. You had said at one point, “Many have said this about the World Trade Towers: never again. I agree, never again will we allow those who threaten our way of life to reign free. Be they terrorists or elected officials. The time to fight back is now, the time to stand up and be counted is today.” Who were you speaking about when you said that?

Watada: I was speaking about everybody. The American people. That we all have that duty, that obligation, that responsibility to do something when we see our government perpetrating a crime upon the world, or even upon us. And I think that the American people have lost that, that sense of duty. There is no self-interest in this war for the vast majority of the American people. And because of that the American soldiers have suffered.

There really is a detachment from this war, and many of the American people, because there is no draft, or for whatever reason, because taxes haven’t been raised, they don’t have anything personally to lose or gain with this war, and so they take little interest.

Sites: Do you think
President Bush and his advisers are guilty of criminal conduct in the prosecution of this war?

Watada: That’s not something for me to determine. I think it’s for the newly-elected congress to determine during the investigations that they should hold over this war, and pre-war intelligence.

Sites: But in some ways you have determined that. You’re saying this is an illegal war, and an illegal act usually takes prosecution by someone with criminal intent. Is that correct?

Watada: Right, and they have taken me to court with that, but they have refused – or it will be very unlikely that the prosecution in the military court will allow me to bring in evidence and witnesses to testify on my behalf that the war is illegal. So therefore it becomes the responsibility of Congress, since the military is refusing to do that. It becomes the responsibility of Congress to hold our elected leaders accountable.

Sites: Now this is the same Congress though that in a lot of ways voted for this war initially. Do you think that they’re going to turn around and in some ways say that they were wrong? And hold hearings to determine exactly that, that they made a mistake as well? It seems like a long shot.

Watada: Right, well I think some in Congress are willing to do that, and some aren’t. And that’s the struggle, and that’s the fight that’s going to occur over the next year.

Sites: Let me ask you why you decided to go to the press with this. In this particular case you’re the first officer – there may have been other officers that have refused these orders, but you’re the first one to really do this publicly. Why did you do that?

Watada: Because I wanted to explain to the American people why I was taking the stand I was taking – that it wasn’t for selfish reasons, it wasn’t for cowardly reasons.

You know, I think the most important reason here is to raise awareness among the American people that hey – there’s a war going on, and American soldiers are dying every day. Hundreds of Iraqis are dying every day. You need to take interest, and ask yourself where you stand, and what you’re willing to do, to end this war, if you do believe that it’s wrong – that it’s illegal, and immoral. And I think I have accomplished that. Many, many people come up to me and say, “because of you, I have taken an active interest in what’s going on over in Iraq.”

And also, you know, [I want to] give a little hope and inspiration back to a lot of people. For a long time I was really without hope, thinking that there was nothing I could do about something that I saw, that was so wrong, and so tragic. And I think a lot of people who have been trying to end this war felt the same way – that there was just nothing that they could do. And I think by taking my stand publicly, and stating my beliefs and standing on those beliefs, a lot of people have taken encouragement from that.

Sites: You’ve said that you had a responsibility to your own conscience in this particular situation. Did you also have a responsibility to your unit as well? I just want to read you a quote from Veterans of Foreign Wars communications director Jerry Newbury. He said “[Lt. Watada] has an obligation to fulfill, and it’s not up to the individual officer to decide when he’s going to deploy or not deploy. Some other officer will have to go in his place. He needs to think about that.” Can you react to that quote?

Watada: You know, what I’m doing is for the soldiers. I’m trying to end something that is criminal, something that should not have been started in the first place and something that is making America less safe – and that is the Iraq war. By just going there and being willing to participate, and doing my job, or whatever I’m told to do – which actually exacerbates the situation and makes it worse – I would not be serving the best interest of this country, nor the soldiers that I’m serving with. What I’m trying to do is end something, as I said, that’s illegal, and immoral, so that all the soldiers can come home and this tragedy can come to an end.

It seems like people and critics make this distinction between an order to deploy and any other order, as if the order to deploy is just something that’s beyond any other order. Orders have to be determined on whether they’re legal or not. And if the order to deploy to a war that is unlawful, if that is given, then that order itself is unlawful.

Sites: How did your peers and your fellow officers react to your decision?

Watada: I know that there have been some people within the military who won’t agree with my stance, and there have been a lot of members of the Army of all ranks who have agreed with what I’ve done. And I see it almost every other day, where someone in uniform, or a dependent, approaches me in person, or through correspondence, and thanks me for what I have done, and either supports or respects my stand.

Sites: You’ve remained on base, and that’s been a situation that can’t be too comfortable for you. Can you fill us in on what that’s been like there?

Watada: I think that for the most part, people that I interact with closely – I have been moved, I’m no longer in the 3rd Striker Brigade, I’m over in 1st Corps – treat me professionally, politely, but keep their distance. I don’t think anybody wants to get involved with the position that I’ve taken, either way. People approach me in private and give me their support.

Sites: Tell me about the repercussions you face in this court martial.

Watada: Well I think with the charges that have been applied to me and referred over to a general court martial, I’m facing six years maximum confinement, dishonorable discharge from the army, and loss of all pay and allowances.

Sites: Are you ready to deal with all those consequences with this decision?

Watada: Sure, and I think that’s the decision that I made almost a year ago, in January, when I submitted my original letter of resignation. I knew that possibly some of the things that I stated in that letter, including my own beliefs, that there were repercussions from that. Yet I felt it was a sacrifice, and it was a necessary sacrifice, to make. And I feel the same today.

I think that there are many supporters out there who feel that I should not be made an example of, that I’m speaking out for what a lot of Americans are increasingly becoming aware of: that the war is illegal and immoral and it must be stopped. And that the military should not make an example or punish me severely for that.

Sites: Do you think that you made a mistake in joining the military? Your mother and father support you in this decision, and your father during the Vietnam War refused to go to Vietnam as well, but instead joined the Peace Corps. He went to his draft board and said, “Let me join the Peace Corps and serve in Peru,” which is what he did. Do you think in hindsight that that might have been a better decision for you as well?

Watada: You know I think that John Murtha came out a few months ago in an interview and he was asked if, with all his experience, in Korea, and Vietnam, volunteering for those wars – he was asked if he would join the military today. And he said absolutely not. And I think that with the knowledge that I have now, I agree. I would not join the military because I would be forced into a position where I would be ordered to do something that is wrong. It is illegal and immoral. And I would be put into a situation as a soldier to be abused and misused by those in power.

Sites: In your speech in front of the Veterans for Peace you said “the oath we take as soldiers swears allegiance not to one man but to a document of principles and laws designed to protect the people.” Can you expand upon that a little bit – what did you mean when you said that?

Watada: The constitution was established, and our laws are established, to protect human rights, to protect equal rights and constitutional civil liberties. And I think we have people in power who say that those laws, or those principles, do not apply to them – that they are above the law and can do whatever it takes to manipulate or create laws that enable them to do whatever they please. And that is a danger in our country, and I think the war in Iraq is just one symptom of this agenda. And I think as soldiers, as American people, we need to recognize this, and we need to put a stop to it before it’s too late.