In a famous line from a classical movie, “The Wizard of Oz,” the wizard responds to the request of the cowardly lion for the quality he believed he lacked: Courage. In that scene, the wizard states, “You are under the unfortunate delusion that simply because you run away from danger, you have no courage. You are confusing courage with wisdom.” The lion previously had overcome his reticence and performed courageously, and the wizard awarded him a medal for his efforts. The supreme irony here is that the lion had that quality within him all along. He only had to look within himself to overcome his own fear and apprehension.
While the merits of the wizard’s comments are debatable, no medal was awarded to the real-life Pvt. Eddie Slovik, the last American soldier executed for desertion, the only one in World War II to have that distinction. Not that the Slovik case was unique. According to records, 21,000 American servicemen deserted during the war. This seemingly large number, however, must be placed in perspective: 16 million Americans served during the war. Deserters were given varying sentences of incarceration. Forty-nine were sentenced to death. Yet only Eddie Slovik paid the ultimate penalty.
Critics have said that the military needed to make an example of someone, given a desertion rate that grew exponentially as the level of fighting in Western Europe intensified late in 1944.
Mr. Slovik seemed the most logical, having written a full confession detailing his desertion, refusing several reasonable requests to rejoin his unit, and having had a record as a petty criminal before the war.
It is highly unlikely that such a draconian penalty will be meted out to a contemporary deserter, currently awaiting judgment by a military court. Traded last year for five top- level Taliban commanders, Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl had been held as a prisoner for five years. The army only recently released its report, supposedly completed five months ago. The report said Sgt. Bergdahl had deserted his unit and recommended a hearing and possible court martial. An earlier investigation in the immediate aftermath of his “absence,” had come to the same conclusion. To a man, all members of his own unit concurred.
Subsequently, Sgt. Bergdahl’s status was changed from deserter to “status unknown.” During this period he was promoted to sergeant, in absentia. Sgt. Bergdahl claims he was tortured while a prisoner and made a number of escape attempts. Yet he was not taken prisoner under honorable circumstances.
He went over voluntarily to the enemy.
A Taliban commander, Haji Nadeem, reported that Sgt. Bergdahl converted to Islam, and gave material aid and support to the Taliban during his captivity. The tribulations he may have experienced while a prisoner, were, therefore, misfortunes of his own making. In fairness, Sgt. Bergdahl is entitled to the presumption of innocence, as is every American charged with a crime. Two weeks ago, on March 26, the lead editorial in The New York Times called on the military to grant Sgt. Bergdahl an honorable discharge. “Anything less,” said the Times, “would deprive a traumatized veteran of benefits, including medical care which he will probably need for years.”
Can this be interpreted as an attempt to restore the reputation of an administration they closely identify with and enthusiastically support?
While the Times’s compassion for an American soldier would be laudable under ordinary circumstances, one cannot help but think of the half-dozen American soldiers who died trying to rescue this man whom the president and his National Security advisor say, “served with honor and distinction,” implying he was a hero.
If the military prosecutor fails to make his case, so be it.
But the actions of the administration, the outcry in certain mpublications calling for an honorable discharge, Sgt. Bergdahl’s change of status from deserter to “status unknown,” his subsequent trade for five top Taliban terrorist commanders, and the army’s excessive five-month delay in releasing its completed report, call into question the use of undue political influence from the highest level.
They cast a pall upon the ability of the military court to properly adjudicate the matter. If the charges are proven, to grant Sgt. Bergdahl an honorable discharge is an affront to every American who ever wore the uniform. If granted, how then could this administration expect soldiers to fight for and sacrifice their lives for our country?
The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have gone on for more than a decade. Hundreds of thousands of Americans have rotated in and out of the war zones. Many went through emotional and psychological catharses at least as traumatic as any experienced by Sgt. Bergdahl. Thousands have returned home bearing not only the physical scars of war but the mental ones as well, yet only Sgt. Bergdahl felt the compunction to desert his post. Gen. Sherman once observed that “war is hell.”
The overwhelming majority of soldiers find within themselves the strength of character necessary to discharge their duties. Bowe Bergdahl, by all accounts, did not. Who then, is the real Bowe Bergdahl? Whom can he be compared with? Certainly not the fictional cowardly lion, who never deserted his post, overcame his fear, and carried out his mission. Nor can a comparison be made with the real-life Eddie Slovik, who took full responsibility for his actions and paid the ultimate penalty.
Did he succumb to his inner demons and desert his post? Or did he exercise his innate wisdom and simply “run away from danger.” On this last point at least, there can be no doubt that the Wizard of Oz would most certainly agree.
Ms. Besner, who has been published by Sun-Sentinel, Jerusalem Post, Jewish Journal, IsraPost, the Jewish Voice, Independent Sentinel, The Times of Israel, San Diego Jewish World, The Algemeiner, Jewish Press, The Florida Veteran, and American Thinker, may be contacted at Greta1953@aol.com
