Front Page > Issues > 2006> July

U.S. Army lieutenant refuses to go to Iraq

First officer to publicly resist deployment overseas

By Dave Mazza

Ehren Watada is an earnest looking, articulate young man of 28. He probably never thought he would become a small piece of U.S. history. But U.S. Army First Lieutenant Watada achieved his place on June 23 by disobeying orders to accompany the Third Stryker Brigade from Fort Lewis, Washington to nearby McChord Air Force Base for deployment somewhere in Iraq. His decision will make him the first officer to publicly refuse to participate in what he and many others consider an illegal and immoral war.

The military did not hesitate in responding to the lieutenant’s actions.

“This morning, Lt. Watada has been restricted to base without any actual charges or proper process,” stated Eric Seitz, attorney for Ehren Watada. “By placing a complete gag order on Lt. Watada, the military has again shown that their first concern is silencing Lt. Watada’s speech in opposition to the illegal war in Iraq. We will immediately challenge these highly questionable and improper restrictions.”

Opposing the military was not an easy step for Watada. He grew up in a family with a strong tradition of military service. His grandfather served in World War II. He had uncles who had served in that conflict as well and one uncle who was killed in the Korean War. And while Watada’s father chose the Peace Corps over military service, he was very proud of his son’s decision to join the army. Watada, after all, had not made the decision lightly.

“I had a strong sense of patriotism after 9.11” stated Watada. “I believed there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and that Hussein had connection to alQaeda and 9.11.”

Completing his degree in business administration from Hawaii Pacific University in May 2003, Watada immediately signed the papers to enter the U.S. Army’s officer program. After successfully completing basic training and officer candidate school, he was commissioned an officer in Dec. 2003. He spent his first year of service in Korea before returning to the U.S. for redeployment to Iraq.

Watada began having doubts about the U.S. mission in Iraq by the time he returned to U.S. soil. These were largely driven by the growing scandal over treatment of prisoners at Abu Ghraib. These personal doubts, as well as his commitment to be the most effective leader he could be for his soldiers, led Watada on a quest to better understand what was happening in Iraq.

“I began reading everything I could,” he stated. “What I found was deeply shocking to me — not just as a member of the military but as a human being.”

The scope of Watada’s research expanded as he found more facts that did not fit with his earlier view of U.S. involvement in Iraq. Starting with newspaper accounts, he soon moved on to works by people like Seymour Hersch. Watada’s doubts about Abu Ghraib were soon joined by questions about the president’s claims about weapons of mass destruction and the connections between Saddam Hussein and 9.11. The conclusion he reached was that U.S. soldiers and Iraqi civilians were dying for reasons far different than those claimed by President Bush. Even worse, the government Watada was supposed to uphold appeared to be acting in violation of U.S. laws and international treaties dating back to the Nuremberg Trials.

If, as Watada now believed, the administration acted illegally to initiate the war against Iraq and continued to break international and U.S. law in the conduct of that war, what was a soldier of conscience to do? Watada was not interested in conscientious objector status. He didn’t accept the military’s definition — refusal to act even when faced by the most horrendous violence, such as an attack against a family member. The lieutenant wanted to continue to defend his country in a lawful way, if possible. Barring that, he wanted out so as not to be a party to what he perceived as immoral acts against the Iraqi people.

The latter option was soon eliminated. Watada requested permission to resign his commission at the close of 2005. The army refused permission. That request denied, Watada had the choice of going to Iraq or following his conscience down a far different path. Either way, he knew his life was about to change dramatically.

The young man did not see this as a choice at all. The bigger question with which he was struggling was how did he proceed while being increasingly isolated from everyone he knew? His first step was telling his family about his decision.

“It was very, very hard to tell them,” Watada stated. “They were very resistant to the idea of my refusing to go to Iraq. They didn’t want their child to go to prison but over time they also saw that I couldn’t live with going against the truth.”
Watada now faced the next step: announcing his intention to not go to Iraq. While his family was now behind him, he still felt isolated. He most likely didn’t realize how deeply resistance to the war ran within the ranks. By USA Today’s count, more than 8,000 men and woman have deserted from the military in the war’s first three years. It is estimated that 400 of those have fled to Canada. A Zogby poll, meanwhile, places 72 percent of the troops stationed in Iraq favoring a withdrawal from the country within the next 12 months.

Having read of the resistance to the Vietnam War, Watada kept wondering: Where were the mass protests and other acts of resistance that had played such an important role in ending that conflict? Were Americans aware of what was happening, and why Watada felt it necessary to risk his liberty?

Fortunately, Watada made contact with Jeff Patterson at this point. Patterson was an ex-Marine who had refused to deploy to Iraq in 1990 because of his concern over possible use of nuclear weapons in that conflict. Patterson went on from that experience to join Not in Our Name, an organization committed to resisting illegal wars and helping those inside and outside the military do the same. Patterson was not only able to lend Watada support in his effort, but also introduce him to other elements of the peace movement — groupslike Veterans for Peace — that could rally to aid Watada during the difficult times ahead.

On June 7, 2006, First Lieutenant Watada held a press conference announcing that he would not accompany his unit to Iraq because he felt the war was illegal, making any order to participate in the conflict unlawful. One of the first things to change from this act was his sense of isolation.

“I felt alone, then after I came out publicly I received e-mails from majors, captains and others who said they felt the same way,” stated Watada. “A lot of soldiers are afraid to act — they need to see public support.”

Watada soon found that support through several speaking engagements organized by Not in Our Name and others, such as the June 17 community meeting in downtown Portland’s First Unitarian Universalist Church. More than 50 peace activists gathered on a sunny Saturday afternoon to hear Watada tell his story, ask how they might help, and raise money for his defense fund.

Watada, restricted to Fort Lewis and under a gag order — Seitz is the only non-military person with which he may speak — has no more opportunities to personally make his case to the public. Instead, he may be facing several additional charges that will increase the pressure on him to recant. The most common charges in cases like these are Missing Movement by Design, Dereliction of Duty, and Conduct Unbecoming an Officer. Charges of Disloyalty and violation of lesser rules and orders are also possible. According to his attorneys, Watada could be facing two to five years in prison, loss of all pay and allowances, and a dishonorable discharge.

Peace activists hope the lieutenant won’t have to face that level of punishment. They hope that as public awareness grows of the Watada case it will pressure the military to back away from making the young man some sort of example. The latter is a serious concern since, unlike others who have refused to serve so far, Watada is a commissioned officer. Traditionally, the military is far less forgiving of officers who resist the authority structure than of enlisted personnel who do so. But as past practice has shown, enough public support — calls to commanding officers and members of congress, protests outside bases and other signs of the public’s feelings — can have a tremendous impact.

Watada is also looking beyond his own case. He sees mobilization of the country against the war as essential to aiding so many others in the military who share his feelings but fear the consequences of speaking out.

“The assumption is that when you join the military that you will obey all orders right or wrong,” stated Watada in his closing remarks at the Portland meeting. “We need to get beyond that and understand that we can only obey lawful orders. Recognizing that and having strong public support can mean more people speaking out as I am doing today.”
Watada can also count on the support of his family.

“My son’s decision to refrain from deploying to Iraq comes through much soul searching,” stated Carolyn Ho, Watada’s mother, at a June 23 press conference on her son’s refusal of his orders. “It is an act of patriotism. It is a statement to all Americans, — to men and women in uniform — that they need not remain silent out of fear, that they have the power to turn the tide of history: to stop the destruction of a country and the killing of untold numbers of innocent men, women and their children. It is a message that states unequivocally that blindly following orders is no longer an option.”

June 27 has been designated a national day of action in support of First Lieutenant Ehren Watada. Local peace groups are being asked to organize rallies or other events to draw public attention to Watada’s situation. For more information, visit ThankYouLT.org.

Dave Mazza is editor of The Portland Alliance.

Editor’s Note: The Alliance will be posting updates on this story on our web site