Yes

by Lou Jones

Created on: November 13, 2007   Last Updated: September 09, 2008

Soldiers should be able to opt out of wars they disagree with.

From a practical viewpoint, military needs soldiers who are ready and willing to carry out orders in dangerous and deadly circumstances. Soldiers who are forced to participate in a war they disagree with are more likely to refuse orders, fail to carry out orders properly, sow dissent, and weaken cohesiveness. A soldier who both disagrees with a war and believes that forcing him or her to participate in that war may become a security risk, a prime target for an enemy always ready to recruit spies and saboteurs.

From both a moral and legal standpoint, the youth of enlistees is an argument for permitting a soldier to opt out. In the United States, seventeen is the minimum age of enlistment. Men and women who are not trusted with alcohol, even men and women who cannot vote and in some states are not legally adults, are permitted to sign a contract that binds them to kill other human beings and risk being killed by other human beings, wherever the US government wishes, whenever the US government wishes, and for whatever reason the US government wishes, with few legal and practical options for refusing on moral grounds once a soldier is in a combat zone.

Ordinarily, young men and women should be encouraged to keep their contracts. However, the moral implications of killing under orders and the reality of personal mortality are usually not grasped at age 21 as they are at age 41, or even age 25. If, under the law, an eighteen-year-old doesn't have the life experience necessary to consume alcoholic beverages, how can an eighteen-year-old be bound to a contract with such complex and life-altering implications?

Because our government changes hands, and because weak checks and balances are even weaker in time of war and outside the borders of the United States, soldiers who enlist during one regime, confident that they will not be deployed to fight in a war they disagree with, may find themselves in different circumstances when the government changes hands.

In addition, no real means exist to prevent governments from using misinformation, secrecy for the purposes of controlling public opinion, and outright lies to conceal the actual motivation for going to war, the nature of the enemy, or the circumstances soldiers will face in the combat zone. If a soldier who finds him or herself shooting at unarmed rioting civilians when he or she expected to combat only armed, foreign terrorists wants out, the government and military should assess public awareness of actual conditions and adjust recruiting pamphlets accordingly. After all, if soldiers are surprised at what they find in the battle zone, the fault lies with those who bring citizens information from the battle zone and with those who guard access to that information. An honest government and military will not withhold this sort of information. We are all better off when dishonest governments and militaries have no soldiers willing to fight at all.

Having said all of this, it is still primarily the job of the citizen to control its government so that wars are few, justified as self defense or, in very rare circumstances, when the good will outweigh the harm, in defense of victims unable to defend themselves. A population that won't bother to inform itself concerning the activities of its government and that doesn't have the courage to control those who speak for it, a population that can't be bothered to keep a close eye and a tight rein on those it designates to send enlisted men and women to kill and die, is better off when its soldiers refuse to fight until such time as that population lives up to its obligations. A country of alert, active citizens will rarely have to deal with soldiers that disagree with its wars. The dissenters will always be few in number and can be permitted to opt out without weakening the military. If a country cannot begin or continue a war without forcing soldiers who disagree with that war to fight, perhaps it's better if the war isn't fought at all.

Learn more about this author, Lou Jones.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.