A Navy Lieutenant No More

[Jack Ray]

Was this worth ruining a career?

A Navy Lieutenant No More
She ended career to protest assigning of sailors ashore

Seattle Post-Intelligencer
April 19, 2008
By Mike Barber, P-I Reporter

EVERETT -- Eleven years ago, Sabrina M. Weiner graduated as a valedictorian at Kamiak High School near Everett. She was a National Merit Scholar, aiming for a bright future after earning a Navy ROTC scholarship to Stanford University.

Two months ago, Weiner, 27, forfeited her Navy career after seven years on active and reserve duty, during which she rose to the rank of lieutenant.

In a rare instance involving a commissioned officer, Weiner was arrested and given a choice between a court-martial or less-than-honorable discharge after refusing to serve in Iraq.

Speaking publicly for the first time about it, Weiner says she was not against the war but the so-called "individual augmentee" program. In the past several years, that program has sent nearly 60,000 sailors from ships and bases to augment Army and Marine ground forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. "It is not an against-the-war argument but a people-accountability argument," Weiner says. "I was proud to say I was a Navy officer. My problem is the way they are using us as IAs. It minimizes the job and training we do for the Navy."

It cannibalizes the Navy -- and Air Force -- to cover up a shortage of Army and Marine troops to fight the wars, she argues.

For her convictions, she was jailed, flown across the nation in shackles and threatened with court-martial. Today she is scraping by in Everett, tutoring high school kids in math and enrolled in graduate studies at the Alden March Bioethics Institute based at the Albany Medical College in New York.

"I'm not another Watada," she cautions, referring to the Fort Lewis Army active duty lieutenant, Ehren Watada. In 2006, Watada refused to accompany his Stryker Brigade to combat duty in Iraq, contending that the war is immoral and unconstitutional.

Unlike Watada, whose case remains active after moving from a military to a federal court last year, Weiner's was resolved within a month in February. And unlike the Army lieutenant, Weiner has not become an anti-war cause for Hollywood celebrities and peace activists.

Navy officials declined to discuss Weiner's case, saying they were unfamiliar with it.

According to the Navy Department, 7,063 active and 5,050 reserve sailors are serving as individual augmentees, not only in Iraq and Afghanistan but also in the Horn of Africa and other locations. They include 3,145 active-duty and reserve officers and more than 9,000 active-duty and reserve enlisted men and women. The Defense Department and top Navy officials have acknowledged that the policy has created hardships for sailors and their families. The Navy has altered the program after listening to complaints from sailors, and invites more input, though it says the program is needed and will remain in place for some time to come.

Assignments are voluntary and involuntary, and reviews from sailors are mixed. Active- and reserve-duty sailors, who declined to be named, cited problems with the program to the Seattle P-I. They included a ship driver from San Diego, a sailor from Eastern Washington and a Navy aviator.

The aviator contacted his congressman after he was suddenly and involuntarily called up to serve alone with ground forces in Iraq, only a few months after returning home to his young family from a full deployment with his squadron flying missions in the war zone.

The individual augmentee jobs typically include public works and reconstruction; training local forces in Afghanistan; medical care; protecting U.S. bases; interpreting laws, especially concerning contractor obligations; forging closer ties with communities in Afghanistan; handling detainees; and administrative work.

Weiner got a call before Christmas that she would soon be called up. She says her job in Iraq was to have been commerce officer, providing money to local Iraqi leaders.

That gave her pause, not only because she was not trained for the job, but also because she is of Japanese, Korean and Jewish ancestry.

"They were going to have me negotiate money transactions with Iraqi warlords. A woman of Jewish and East Asian descent to try to talk to men about money in a country where women aren't always allowed to handle money," Weiner says.

Weiner's record and fitness reports before she was called up to IA duty indicate anything but a shrinking violet. She had earned two overseas service ribbons, commendation and achievement medals and was part of a Meritorious Unit Commendation.

After graduating from Stanford in 2001, Weiner started her career aboard the amphibious assault ship USS Essex, a vessel second in size only to aircraft carriers and which transports Marine landing forces. She was serving overseas during the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks.

She received glowing fitness reports:

"Assigned to arduous sea duty ... ," her commander wrote in one review. "Outstanding officer and Navy professional! On the fast track! Assign only to the most challenging jobs!"

She left active duty in August 2004, receiving high marks in her final evaluation in all categories but professional expertise.

By 2005, Weiner as a reservist worked as a research liaison officer at the prestigious Office of Naval Research. Her detachment was responsible for managing research in underwater unmanned vehicles and weaponry. She also served as the unit's public information officer. Her fitness reports continued to average "above standards" or "greatly exceeds standards." A commander called her "an excellent officer" and "a highly motivated self-starter."

Her last good report was November 2007, this time newly assigned to a joint service unit of the Selective Service System in New Orleans.

"She is most strongly recommended for promotion and greater responsibility in the Naval Reserve," her commander wrote.

It all unraveled on Jan. 9 when she received orders to be called up.

She agonized over the policy and her own convictions, readiness and obligations as an officer. The job seemed to her a random call for a warm body.

"I was not afraid of dying; I was afraid of acting out of weakness," she said. "It would have been easier to just go along with it." Weiner was to report Jan. 28. She was depressed, and she tried to call local Navy lawyers for advice. "I was told they could do nothing because I'm a reservist" with her headquarters in New Orleans, she said.

She turned to GI Rights hot line, a nonprofit organization at www.objector.netthat offers legal help to servicemen and women, especially to those refusing to go to war.

Weiner found a lawyer and filed a request for personal hardship. In a conference call, her commanding offer was angry at her, she said. "I never got to tell them why I was refusing to deploy," she said. He ordered her report to New Orleans.

Weiner said she refused to report while her request for exemption was in the pipeline. Counselors and lawyers seemed unfamiliar with how to handle officers refusing to report, having handled mostly Army enlisted personnel.

A Navy official tried to reach her at her parents' home. Weiner was told to report voluntarily or risk arrest and being transported in shackles.

"My dad said, 'We support you. They are trying to send you to an Army position in Iraq. I understand.' "

Weiner put her jobs and a graduate program in bioethics on hold. She said she was preparing to pack for New Orleans on the night Everett police arrived at her door.

Weiner said she was booked and strip searched and did nothing to resist, and credits jail and military authorities who handled her arrest with "acting very professionally." Though friends and the GI Rights people knew of her situation, she wanted no action or protest. " I wanted to know what the Navy will do." Military police took over and escorted her in shackles, walking to help her conceal them and avoid attention through the airports from Seattle and in New Orleans. "The staff was kind and wonderful to me," she said.

She was flown to New Orleans on a Friday night, and the Navy was ready for her: Face detention, then a court-martial or accept an other-than-honorable discharge, a separation from the service in a middle ground, ranking below honorable and general discharges but above bad conduct and dishonorable discharges.

Weiner said she mulled how much it might affect her later life. Wanting to teach and write after graduate school, she opted for the discharge. She was flown home the next day. Her final fitness report dated Feb. 20, 2008, sharply contrasts her earlier ones.

"Lt. Weiner's failure to report ... was counter to good order and discipline, negatively affected the command climate and represents a failure to live up to the Navy core values of honor, courage and commitment. Lt. Weiner effectively put her personal desires above the needs of the Navy team and the nation. ... Lt. Weiner is most strongly recommended for separation from the Navy."

The episode still makes her emotional both in what she gave up and for the support she has received. Weiner feels she showed honor, courage and commitment. She wants to continue to serve her community, perhaps to apply her studies in bioethics to ensuring the safety of the food we eat.

"I want people to know about IAs, but there's a good side," she says.

"The Navy did the best it could. I have no hard feelings. We are there to serve -- we serve the constitution."

[chuck]

I suspect that no navy in the world would give a legally binding job description up front. She probably had the option to resign from the service. I think her outspokeness against what had been assigned her was indeed not commensurate with good discipline and cohesion, and her forced departure was a mild response to what I would think is fairly damaging violation.

[Devin]

I wonder if she had the option to resign after they gave her the job description. With the advent of the abuse of Stop Loss and Individual Augmentees I would not be surprised at all if her only two options were take the assignment or be discharged.

While part of me says "well hell, I didn't want to do a lot of stuff while I was in the Navy", to send a woman to Iraq in that role is idiotic. They would have had to expend far more manpower to assure her safety, or she would end up dead. More brilliance from the chuckle heads at the top.

[Werner]

While part of me says "well hell, I didn't want to do a lot of stuff while I was in the Navy", to send a woman to Iraq in that role is idiotic. They would have had to expend far more manpower to assure her safety, or she would end up dead. More brilliance from the chuckle heads at the top.

She is a medical professional. She ought to have known her job would take her to combat zones. I personally know a woman naval surgeon who has done several tours in Iraq. There is something untold in this story.

The part of the story about a naval aviator called up to serve as a rifleman in Iraq is clearly a fabrication.

[Devin]

I don't see where they say the pilot was serving as a rifleman. They say he was serving on the ground, that could mean anything; liaison, forward air controller, etc. I wouldn't discount that as a fabrication without knowing more about the circumstances. I'd also suggest that there's a big difference between a Naval surgeon doing a tour in Iraq - most likely on a US base and not doing house calls - and this job description of delivering bribe money to local warlords.

I agree there is most definitely more to this story, proven by the Navy's typical response when they get caught in something: "Navy officials declined to discuss Weiner's case, saying they were unfamiliar with it". How convenient for them.

[Werner]

The aviator contacted his congressman after he was suddenly and involuntarily called up to serve alone with ground forces in Iraq, only a few months after returning home to his young family from a full deployment with his squadron flying missions in the war zone.

After spending millions training him to be a carrier pilot in the war zone, they would not put him in the position where a rifle bullet could cash in that investment.

The Post Intelligencer is no doubt following in the distinguished footprints of the New York Times and CBS News by fabricating stories in an election year.

No doubt this is backlash for the lack of audience for the movie Stop Loss, which, I think was only seen by 5,000 paying customers.

[Jack Ray]

I personally know of a case in the fall of 2005 where a naval reserve lieutenant, a military journalist, "fell below the line" and found himself in Iraq commanding an Army reconstruction battalion.

Apparently, "below the line" means between two assignments--a particulary vulnerable place.

He was unhappy, but did not refuse to go.

Jack

[Lesforan]

Quite obviously, Ms. Weiner knew her refusal would involve unpleasant consequences. Yet she knowingly sacrificed her career to stand on her principals. For this I feel she should be neither lauded nor condemned.

She could have gone along with her deployment if she had wanted to save her career. At least she had a choice.

While the military cannot guarantee a person will always work in their Military Occupational Specialty, I don't think it is unreasonable for a volunteer to expect that his/her service in the military should be at least in the branch they signed up for.

[Werner]

I see the words "Duty, Honor, Country" do not include convenience, comfort or even fairness. People who sign up for the service generally know what they signed up for.

Articles like this dishonor the thousands of soldiers, sailors and Marines who sign right up to go back immediately after the end of their tours because they believe in the mission.

[Timmy C]

People who sign up for the service generally know what they signed up for.

Except, in this case, she -didn't- know that when signing up for the Navy, that she would be personally dealing with (possibly) fundamentalist Islamic warlords as an East Asian Jewish female!

There is a line between legal and dutiful actions versus impractical. This crosses that. Sending a person of her heritage and gender into a situation where she would be at an distinct disadvantage, not to mention an area in which she was not trained, is -not- conducive to a practical outcome. If they wanted to reassign her to Iraq in an area of her expertise, then that's fine, but throwing her into the deep end full of sharks is not. Find someone else who is going to have a better chance at it.

[Werner]

I don't see any reference to her religion in the piece. Even if she is Jewish, she would not be the only person of that faith to serve in Iraq. In addition, I would imagine any non-Muslim could make a claim of fear regarding tolerance in the area.

[Devin]

Articles like this dishonor the thousands of soldiers, sailors and Marines who sign right up to go back immediately after the end of their tours because they believe in the mission.

Nonsense. An Article can not dishonor anyone that does not wish it. Words on a page. That's the same type of thinking that says you can't criticize the war because you'll hurt the feelings of the troops. Does anyone really think the fighting men and women of this country are that simple? They can look at the facts and make the decisions themselves. During Gulf War Part 1 I was well aware of protests happening on college campuses, and I can assure you it made no difference in my decision to be in the military and in the war.

I agree with Les, she is not to be commended or condemned. I for one am glad to see these sorts of stories talked about, though, as it shows the extents that the military has to go to in order to meet manning obligations. Regardless of reasons for this war, it has been murder on the men and women in uniform, and as long as everyone shuts up, toes the line, and no one hears about it, there will be no pressure put on those in charge to make any changes.

[Devin]

I don't see any reference to her religion in the piece. Even if she is Jewish, she would not be the only person of that faith to serve in Iraq. In addition, I would imagine any non-Muslim could make a claim of fear regarding tolerance in the area.

"That gave her pause, not only because she was not trained for the job, but also because she is of Japanese, Korean and Jewish ancestry."

[Werner]

Sorry, my apologies. My statement still stands, that she would not be the only person (or woman) of Jewish faith to serve in Iraq.

[Timmy C]

But in the capacity that she was proposed to be served? Up close and personal, dealing with (probably) intolerant fundamentalists in a non-combative role? There is a difference between a combat soldier charged with keeping guard or a surgeon dealing with his or her own mates versus directly dealing with someone whom you are not likely to be very successful .

It's not so much a matter of personal concern, but rather, practicality. Why would you send someone who is untrained and significantly disadvantaged in place of someone else who would be more suitable?

[Werner]

Yes, the posting makes no sense, for someone from the ONR to be assigned so speaks of incompetence at the detailer level within personnel and administration department. Of course, without seeing her fitness reports, she may have done something which would have caused them to try to squeeze her out with this assignment.

There are many avenues to work an issue like this; clearly she failed to use them and resorted to embarrassing the Navy by making a family squabble a public matter.

[chuck]

Quite obviously, Ms. Weiner knew her refusal would involve unpleasant consequences. Yet she knowingly sacrificed her career to stand on her principals. For this I feel she should be neither lauded nor condemned.

She could have gone along with her deployment if she had wanted to save her career. At least she had a choice.

While the military cannot guarantee a person will always work in their Military Occupational Specialty, I don't think it is unreasonable for a volunteer to expect that his/her service in the military should be at least in the branch they signed up for.

A volunteer specialist ought to be able to choose which order to obey, but a volunteer grunt had better take a bullet if told to do so?

How's this "principle" materially different from cowardess? Any coward could be expected to knowingly sacrafice her career to stand by her principle so long as that principle involves reducing danger to her life. She certainly had sacraficed her career. Which I would say makes for a fair trade were it not also for the fact that she jepardized the cohesion and discipline of her unit. This she can not repay by merely loosing her career.

I think it is not unreasonable for the military to send you damn well anywhere they need you. Your value, no matter how highly you might think of your self and how many Trillions of dollars were invested in your training, is still not a single penny higher than the value of the post that needs you most. You volunteered. They didn't draft you. When you volunteered you voluntarily swore to obey any lawful order and put the good of the service above your own.

[Werner]

I think it is not unreasonable for the military to send you damn well anywhere they need you. Your value, no matter how highly you might think of your self and how many Trillions of dollars were invested in your training, is still not a single penny higher than the value of the post that needs you most. You volunteered. They didn't draft you. When you volunteered you voluntarily swore to obey any lawful order and put the good of the service above your own.

Absolutely!

[NAVMACS_V2]

She could have reported and then made her objections known. There's a good chance if she made her case she might have been assigned a different job. But deciding not to report was a bad idea. Particularly for an officer. She shouldn't complain too much: you can hang for desertion during wartime A crewmember on my ship deserted right before we deployed to the Persian gulf. He got ten years in Leavenworth when he got caught.

[Walt]

I seem to remember..
"I swear to defend the Constitution of The United States from all enemys , foreign and domestic"
The good LT made a choice.. not a wise choice .. Now she must prepare to accept the penalty for such a poor and illegal choice . You have no "Bill of Rights" while in the service.. This is the same pledge all service people swear to uphold.. There is no if or sometimes in that pledge..She should get prison but during these days of soft Military law she won't...I'll wager she cashes her pay checks...
If your Boss orders you to Iraq .. then go or suffer the consenquences. It's not the Girl Scouts.