Plenty of former officers have criticized the Iraq War, but there's only been one active duty career soldier who's not only come out against the War but also refused to go and fight in it. (He said he would go to Afghanistan instead, but that the Iraq war is "illegal"). That soldier is Lt. Ehren Watada, 30, a junior Army officer from Hawaii who's become a poster child for the anti-war movement. He's also become persona non grata within the military and is facing a possible sentence of six years in prison.
Our friend Tara McKelvey is the first journalist who has gotten close to him in more than a year. She's written an amazing story for The American Prospect about Watada, who's now in legal limbo and being subtly punished at a desk job.
Watada's critique of the Iraq War's legality is boosted by the recent release of the Senate Intelligence Committee's report on prewar Iraq intel. And his commitment to doing what he thinks is right is impressive. He told McKelvey:
"I realized we had been lied to. I was standing out in the middle of the desert, and I had a deep sense of betrayal. I had joined an army, and I thought it was noble. And to think we had engaged in something that had caused so much carnage and destruction and then to find out it was unnecessary. There I was in uniform, and I felt ashamed of what I was being asked to do. I think there's no bigger crime than taking your country into a war based on lies."
At the same time, someone else is just going to go in his place, and so members of the military are understandably angry at him for refusing to get on the plane. (They're even madder about his very public statements opposing the War.) Paul D. Eaton, a retired Army major general who was one of the retired generals who in 2006 called for Rumsfeld's resignation said, "Watada is an active-duty soldier, and he has failed to obey the orders of the officers over him. He does not have the right."
Read the article here. What do you think, is Watada a hero or a criminal?
Reader Comments ( Page 2 of 7)
16. CJ... your statement about wanting to go to Colombia instead of Iraq or Afghanistan shows your ignorance of the facts in all these countries.
David at 2:22PM on Jun 11th 2008
17. In regards to CJ's comments, a soldier is not obligiated to follow an order when it is illegal. The war in Iraq is illegal because it is based on lies and deception. As a former military policeman, I learned the UCMJ MCM quite well and can vouch for what is legal and what is not.
And as to those responsible for this action, they are war criminals in every definition of what came out of the Nuremburg trials. The problem with them being held responsible is that too many of our so called reps in Congress just look the other way instead of taking the action that they took an oath to do; that is, uphold the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Their support of this illegal war shows the comtempt they have for the ideals that made America great in times past.
Coz at 2:34PM on Jun 11th 2008
18. Thomas, with all due respect, you have a misunderstanding of what occurred at the mistrial
You wrote:
"The judge declared a mistrial because he determined that, as a matter of law, the deployment order was legal, and that therefore, Watada's acknowledgement of the order coupled with that ruling meant that 1. there was nothing to try on the facts, and 2. Watada could not explain why he refused, and since he had done so before the court-martial panel, the judge determined the case irrevocably flawed."
This is not the case. Ehren stipulated to the fact that he did not deploy, therefore since the judge had deemed the order LEGAL, he stated that Ehren had admitted guilt unwittingly. This however was not the case, Ehren stipulated to FACT but NOT intent- he claimed he had a defense for not deploying which of course was the illegality of the war, he NEVER plead guilty to intent. This defense was not allowed, every single witness that Ehren subpoenaed to testify to the illegality of the war was not allowed. The last day of the court martial there were to be only two witnesses, Ehren, and another officer as a character witness. The fact of the matter is that the day before the prosecutor's witnesses were better witnesses for the defense! So you are correct in feeling the trial was not going as the judge might have like it to have.
The fact of the matter is, BOTH parties objected to the mistrial. Then they went behind closed doors and when they reappeared the prosecution asked for a mistrial. You have to realize they put a new prosecutor on the case, and if you were there you would know he was piss-poor.
Now, where does Ehren stand? No court in this land has the right to call a mistrial simply because the trial isn't going the way they want it to. Judge Head was fully aware of what Ehren had signed, he was FULLY aware Ehren was willing to put on a defense, even if in the end, it only boiled down to him testifying on his own behalf. Judge Head by calling the mistrial stopped in midstream Ehren's RIGHT to his trial and to bear witness for himself.
Judge Settles found merit in Ehren's double jeopardy appeal and that is where it stands at the moment, with a temporary injunction against a retrial All this talk about Ehren's guilt is not even at issue currently. The military has been put on notice by Judge Settles to prove to the court why a retrial is not in violation of Ehren's Constitutional rights under double jeopardy. In the meantime he is not allowed to leave the military at which there has also been a writ of habeas corpus filed.
Until the military responds-and at this point it has been more than seven months, Ehren is in limbo.
Robin at 2:39PM on Jun 11th 2008
19. Matthew Kurtz:
First of all, personally I believe Lt. Watada should be in prison.
But, there is legal precedent for what he is doing. If Nuremburg proved anything, it is that even a soldier, even in a time of war, has a legal obligation to refuse to follow orders that are illegal. So, IF the war in Iraq is illegal, ordering him to participate would be the equivalent of ordering him to participate in a crime.
Keith J. Mohrhoff at 7:27AM on Jun 12th 2008
20. Perhaps Major Tom, you didn't read my prior post.
I do not support the war in Iraq. Wether it is an "illegal war" or not, I don't know I'm not a lawyer, and I dobt anyone will ever make a definitive desicsion on it or not.
I whole heartedly agree that the fight should be focused on Al Qaeda. (As a side note, I would like to point out that during my time in Iraq, my Battalions primary enemy was an Al Qaeda cell in Iraq! But that is besides the point.)
2Lt. Watada is not a hero. He is disregarding his duty as an officer in the US Military. He doesn't get to question orders. You just can't do that. If you do the system falls apart. He doesn't get that right anymore, it is how the military has to work.
God bless, Chief Inspector Romito, and all who gave their lives that day. God bless, the more than 4,000 men who have given their lives in Operation Iraqi Freedom. THAT is a hero. Someone who stands up for what is right and makes great sacrifices in the face of terrible adversity- that is a hero. But a hero does not at the same time do as much bad as he does good.
Should this man be in any other feild, or position in Goverment, and refuse to do his job under threat of jail, punishment etec., then absolutly he whould have been a hero.
I don't know if you have served in the millitary or not, but you need to understand that behavior like this cannot be allowed.
Things are different in the Military. It is not done to be cruel, to make soldiers into "robots" or anything of that nature, It is simply an issue of that when orders are questioned, men die.
And finally, volunteering to serve in Afghanistan doesn't make him a hero either. I volunteered to join the Army in 2005 fully knowing there were 2 wars going on, and knowing I could, and should go to college. I scored high enough on entrance exams to join any branch of service I wanted, and with any job I wanted. I chose Army Infantry, 11B "Grunt". Does this make me a hero? Absolutely not.
Matthew Kurtz at 2:49PM on Jun 11th 2008
21. He's a hero. Doing the wrong thing(fighting a war over lies/deceptions, killing civilians) for the right reasons(because your superior officer says to) is STILL DOING THE WRONG THING. He should be commended for bringing further late to our national shame. Men of conscience would rather sit in jail than have all this innocent blood on their hands.
Sheep on...
Seth at 5:13PM on Jun 11th 2008
22. He's a piece of crap and a coward to boot. Nothing less. To take the money and then balk at the duty while others go and do theirs is about as a low as you can get in my book, contrary to what all the Bush haters and draft dodgers and their kin from the 60's think.
Gere at 2:59PM on Jun 11th 2008
23. I HOPE THEY PUT THIS LITTLE WHIMPERING BABY AWAY FOR 20 YEARS ... HE'S PROBABLY TOO AFRAID OF GETTING HIS PRECIAOUS SKIN BLEMISHED ... ALL HE WANTED WAS THE MONEY AND SECURITY HE COULDN'T EARN OTHERWISE!!! ... A TYPICAL MINORITY TYPE!!!
FRANK at 7:25PM on Jun 11th 2008
24. For Robin, You were lucky to be at the trial! While I may not have read the entire transcript or watched the comings and goings (sometimes even more fun) I think we are saying substantially the same thing in that 1. both prosecution and defense objected to the sua sponte mistrial 2. Learned Head [couldn't resist that one] determined that Watada's stipulation, coupled with the Judge's decision on the legal status of the order would leave nothing for the panel to do but determine the appropriate punishment--kind of like a directed verdict for the government--and since that would take the case outside the hands of the panel, he couldn't really do that, "in good conscience."
So, what the Judge was applying as black letter law was that there is no such thing as "reasonable" refusal of a legal order [i.e., lack of proof beyond a reasonable doubt as to the Defendant's willful disobedience or reasons for believing the order was illegal.] Oddly enough, the Judge appeared to take the position that he was protecting Watada from making another reasonable mistake of fact: that telling the truth when your lawyer tells you that you should, and where even the prosecutor is agreeing with your lawyer, is not allowed. Watada didn't need a Defense attorney. The kindly Judge would take care of the matter for him.
In doing so, the Judge [in my opinion] has created a bigger problem for the Army than Watada ever has.
I suspect someday there will a very fine book written about the Watada trial debacle. Maybe you will write it!
Yours, Major Tom
Thomas Shoener at 3:17PM on Jun 11th 2008
25. This war is a lie but as a soldier you must obey orders. Let your family and the public protest the war. Hopefully, Bush and Cheney will be tried for war crimes after they leave office. I won't hold my breath but both men should spend the rest of their sorry lives in prison.
IMO at 3:21PM on Jun 11th 2008
26. Retired Major General Eaton says, "He doesn't have the right...?" By this line of reasoning, we should apologize to all the Nazis who were tried, put to death and/or imprisoned for "just following orders." Watada is absolutely right to question the legality and morality of the Iraq War since the premise for going to War is, has been and continues to be based upon lies and misinformation deliberately feed to the people of the U.S. by the Bush administration and by the Media. Standing up for the right "thing/issue" is always the correct thing to do.
Elizabeth at 3:59PM on Jun 11th 2008
27. To all you soldiers that think he is wrong Since when did a soldier become non American and someone that has no right to an opinion. Those that don't want to have to think for themselves joins the military. I look up to this guy as he has a brain and uses it Sorry you feel you are a soldier first and an American second. This war is sure not a way to make friends and influence people more like a way to make America hated and disrected in the world community. If that is what you want for this great country you are not defending my rights nor doing a service for this country. I have always had great respect for our military but after reading what you so called soldiers have to say My respect for you is diminishing.
jinkiescoo58 at 3:24PM on Jun 11th 2008
28. jinkiescoo58...
A Soldier's job isn't to think or question orders. They don't loose the right to question them, but they cannot act on it as a Soldier. Its called Duty.
Matthew Kurtz at 3:42PM on Jun 11th 2008
29. Major Tom,
If you were there, you would know Judge Head was not trying to do Ehren any favors whatsoever. Judge Head was simply determined from day one to not allow Ehren his defense. Then after he declared the mistrial he refused to recuse himself from the case and ruled in his OWN behalf that a retrial should occur! Anyone with a lick of sense knows that you are certainly not unbiased when ruling on yourself, what a JOKE. Ehren exhausted all of his pleas all the way up to the highest military court in Virginia which ruled there was no malfacence (?) on the part of the court! That is when Ehren's new attorneys took it to to the FEDERAL COURT, outside the military. Interestingly, this is a very important point, Judge Settles (the one who issued the temporary injunction) is a Bush appointee and former JAG prosecutor. So NO ONE can say that he is unqualified to rule, and when he handed down the temporary injunction in favor of Ehren's double jeopardy claim the military was supposed to reply in due time. It has now been seven months. Some action is expected this coming fall according to what his attorneys have stated.
Also, in the first court martial, Ehren had cooperated with the prosecution and stipulated to two statements he made, one to Sara Olson, and also on behalf of Dahr Jamail who had transcribed his speech before the IVAW. He did this, admitted to making the statements in order to stop the military subpoenas of both Olson and Jamail. Now those charges are being added back on, so IF he is re-court martialed, he will be facing more time in prison than at the first court martial.
Here are my notes from the mistrial
http://thehollytree.blogspot.com/2007/02/notes-
from-inside-watada-mistrial.html
And once again to everyone writing here. Ehren's guilt is NOT in question legally at the moment. What is in question is did the military mishandle the first court martial and therefor a retrial is in violation of his Constitutional rights of double jeopardy. It has been just over sixteen months since he was tried. That day his condo had been packed up and he was prepared to be taken in to custody had he been found guilty. How many people are willing to go to prison for years based on their OWN convictions? Calling Ehren a coward is simply nonsense and an affront to him as a human being. Ehren not only graduated at the top of his officer's training, he was also an Eagle Scout. Ehren's defense was that HE could not deploy to Iraq because HE felt the war was illegal. Way back in January when he did absolutely everything by the book to try to resign from the military which was his right to do as an officer, he was told, "Don't make a young man's mistake". He was dismissed, this same officer above him at that point deemed him unfit yet he STILL insisted on issuing the deployment orders. When asked by Ehren's attorney why he would want to deploy an officer he deemed unfit Lt. Col. James had NO ANSWER.
The point being NOW, is that Ehren is entitled to his rights under the law. He is entitled to a FAIR hearing in due time but thus far the military has avoided this both with the uncalled for mistrial, and now with their dragging their feet on the case currently at hand (double jeopardy). His attorneys have publicly stated it could take up to three years.
So there you all have it who is reading here. Pontificate all you want about his guilt or innocence, but Ehren has the right to a FAIR hearing and not to be continually held in limbo by the military.
Robin at 3:57PM on Jun 11th 2008
30.
As a veteran, I would say it's a tough call.
Is he a hero for refusing to go to Iraq?
1. Did he volunteer for service?
2. What did he think he was volunteering for?
3 Did he list himself as a C.O. before he was called to duty?
4. If this is allowed to continue, what kind of service can we expect from other troops?
I have no answers...only questtions.
mac at 4:05PM on Jun 11th 2008