US Conscientious objector Tony Anderson sentenced to 14 months

CLICK VIDEO TO SEE TONY’S COMMENTS

On
Monday, 17 November 2008, US Iraq war resisters Tony Anderson has been
sentenced to 14 months of confinement and given a dishonourable
discharge from the military for “desertion with intent to avoid
hazardous duty” and “disobeying a lawful order”. The young soldier
refused to deploy to Iraq in July of this year on the grounds of
conscientious objection to war.

Tony Anderson
“I know in my
heart that it is wrong to willfully hurt or kill another human being. I
simply cannot do it. I don’t regret following my conscience,” he said
at his trial as he struggled to compose himself. “I know there must be
consequences for my actions and I must accept this fact.”

Immediately
after being sentenced, Anderson was placed in handcuffs and taken to
the Colorado Springs Criminal Justice Center, where he will be held for
a few weeks until he is moved to an army stockade.

The 14 month sentence is one of the longest given to a U.S. military serviceperson for refusing to fight in Iraq.

Hailing
from the small city of Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, Anderson says that
he was never very attracted to military life, but joined the service at
the behest of his father, who had always regretted not joining the
military himself. Once in the ranks, Anderson realized that he had made
an unfortunate decision. During basic training, he found himself
ethically opposed to taking a human life in a military conflict. He was
disturbed by seeing soldiers on his base return from Iraq deeply
traumatized from their experience in combat. “I didn’t want to mess
myself up for the rest of my life doing something I didn’t want to do
to begin with,” he says.

Anderson had vague thoughts about
filing for conscientious objector (C.O.) status but was discouraged
from doing so by his commanding officers, who told him that it would
not be possible for him to obtain, and even falsely informed him that
he was “not the right religion.” Anderson was led to believe that
filing a C.O. application would be futile.

Anderson says that
when he was ordered to deploy to Iraq on July first, he “freaked out.”
“What upset me most was the thought having to hurt or kill someone
else,” he said at his trial. “I know this may be hard to believe, but I
never really thought about the idea of hurting or killing another human
being before I joined the military. And then in training, it just
didn’t seem real. I knew I could be deployed someday but I just never
gave it much thought. But when I got to Ft. Carson and heard that I
would be going to Iraq, I realized that this was something I would have
to resolve.”

Just hours before boarding his flight, he went
AWOL, eventually turning himself in after 22 days in hopes of
diminishing the severity of his punishment. On his return, Anderson was
again ordered to deploy to Iraq immediately. This time, he simply
refused, and he says, “they haven’t tried to deploy me since then
because they realize I’m not going to go.”

The young soldier,
who remained in tears during much of the trial, did not have family
present at his court martial. His mother sent a statement saying she
does not agree with what her son did but believes that he was sincerely
trying to follow his conscience.

Anderson’s civilian lawyer,
James Branum, expressed frustration with the lack of fair process for
cases of conscience and said, “I am disappointed by how long Tony’s
sentence was. 14 months is on the high end, but it could have been
worse. At least Tony was able to have his day in court.”

At the
trial, Tony read a statement explaining that he was sincerely trying to
do the right. He told of being deterred from for conscientious objector
status at every step along the way, leaving him with the impression
that his only option was outright refusal. He expressed regret that he
did not initially move forward with the conscientious objector
application.

Anderson closed by saying, “I only ask that you remember that I was trying to do the right thing.”

War Resisters’ International calls for letters of support to Tony Anderson.

Tony Anderson
El Paso County Sheriff’s Office
2739 E. Las Vegas
Colorado Springs, CO 80906
USA
(Tony
Anderson will be moved within the next few weeks. You can check if he
is still at El Paso County Jail at http://tinyurl.com/TonyAnderson)

War
Resisters’ International calls for letters of protest to the US
government, and US authorities abroad. A protest email to US President
George W. Bush can be sent at
http://wri-irg.org/co/alerts/20081121a.html.

War Resisters’
International calls for the immediate release of conscientious objector
Tony Anderson and all imprisoned conscientious objectors.

Andreas Speck
War Resisters’ International

Archives of co-alert can be found at http://wri-irg.org/news/alerts

 

 

Who is Tony Anderson?

Hailing
from the small city of Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, Anderson says that
he was never very attracted to military life, but joined the service at
the behest of his father, who had always regretted not joining the
military himself. Once in the ranks, Anderson realized that he had made
an unfortunate decision. During basic training, he found himself
ethically opposed to taking a human life in a military conflict. He was
disturbed by seeing soldiers on his base return from Iraq deeply
traumatized from their experience in combat. “I didn’t want to mess
myself up for the rest of my life doing something I didn’t want to do
to begin with,” he says.

Anderson had vague thoughts about
filing for conscientious objector (C.O.) status but was discouraged
from doing so by his commanding officers, who told him that it would
not be possible for him to obtain, and even falsely informed him that
he was “not the right religion.” Anderson was led to believe that
filing a C.O. application would be futile.

Anderson says that
when he was ordered to deploy to Iraq on July first, he “freaked out.”
“What upset me most was the thought having to hurt or kill someone
else,” he said at his trial. “I know this may be hard to believe, but I
never really thought about the idea of hurting or killing another human
being before I joined the military. And then in training, it just
didn’t seem real. I knew I could be deployed someday but I just never
gave it much thought. But when I got to Ft. Carson and heard that I
would be going to Iraq, I realized that this was something I would have
to resolve.”

Just hours before boarding his flight, he went
AWOL, eventually turning himself in after 22 days in hopes of
diminishing the severity of his punishment. On his return, Anderson was
again ordered to deploy to Iraq immediately. This time, he simply
refused, and he says, “they haven’t tried to deploy me since then
because they realize I’m not going to go.”

Objection to war

Anderson
is not alone: a growing number of U.S. troops are refusing to fight in
the so-called “war on terror.” Army soldiers are resisting service at
the highest rate since 1980, with an 80 percent increase in desertions,
defined as absence for more than 30 days, since the invasion of Iraq in
2003, according to the AP Press. Over 150 resisters have come out
publicly against the war, and some cases, such as Lt. Ehren Watada, the
first army officer to refuse to deploy to Iraq, have garnered
widespread support and attention.

Meanwhile, an increasing
number of active duty G.I.s have been joining Iraq Veterans Against the
War (IVAW), an organization comprised of over 1,200 U.S. veterans who
have served since September 11, 2001. With 12 active duty members at
Anderson’s base alone, IVAW has taken a position of open support for
G.I. resisters.

The rising number of troops who do not want to
join the war face a challenge because conscientious objector status is
difficult to obtain. C.O.s must prove that they are opposed to war in
all forms, that their objection is based on “religious training and
belief,” which can include moral or ethical training, and that their
beliefs are “sincere and deeply held.” The application process is
arduous and includes written applications, a series of examinations,
and a hearing with an investigative officer. A decision on an
application can take up to a year, and in the interim a C.O.
application cannot forestall deployment to a combat zone, although it
can help ensure that applicants are assigned duties which conflict as
little as possible with C.O. convictions. Applicants face pressures to
drop the issue from commanding officers, who “accidentally” lose the
applications, impose informal punishments on C.O. applicants, or give
false information about the process, as in the case of Anderson.

There
has been no reliable study of the difficulty of obtaining C.O. status.
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report finding
that between 2002 and 2006, the Marine Corps and Coast Guard approved a
third of C.O. applications, Army officials approved 55 percent, the Air
Force approved 62 percent, and the Navy approved 84 percent. Critics
claim, however, that these figures are grossly misrepresentative, as
they do not factor in the number of potential applicants who are
deterred at all stages of the process: anyone who did not make it
entirely through the application process was not counted by the GAO.

Elizabeth
Stinson, Director of the Sonoma County Peace and Justice Center, urges
potential applicants not to be deterred by the difficulty of obtaining
C.O. status and counsels them to seek support from allies in the peace
movement. “Applying for conscientious objector status is hard,” she
says. ” Still, I would love to see the amount of conscientious objector
applicants go up. For some, it can be the most liberating thing ever.”

“There
is a huge problem with people being discouraged by the chain of command
from going through the process of applying for C.O. status,” said
Andrew Gorby, who was discharged from the Army in May 2007 as a
conscientious objector and now works for the Center on Conscience and
War, a counseling organization that works to defend the rights of
conscientious objectors. “But being granted C.O. status is possible. It
is a matter of getting in touch with a qualified C.O. counseling
organization.”

Court Martial

The young soldier, who
remained in tears during much of the trial, did not have family present
at his court martial. His mother sent a statement saying she does not
agree with what her son did but believes that he was sincerely trying
to follow his conscience.

Anderson’s civilian lawyer, James
Branum, expressed frustration with the lack of fair process for cases
of conscience and said, “I am disappointed by how long Tony’s sentence
was. 14 months is on the high end, but it could have been worse. At
least Tony was able to have his day in court.”

At the trial,
Tony read a statement explaining that he was sincerely trying to do the
right. He told of being deterred from for conscientious objector status
at every step along the way, leaving him with the impression that his
only option was outright refusal. He expressed regret that he did not
initially move forward with the conscientious objector application.

Anderson closed by saying, “I only ask that you remember that I was trying to do the right thing.”