Conscientious Objectiors to War: An American Buddhist's Perspective with Resources for Objectors

Close this window to return to the page you were on before.
Send This Site To Friends

Letter to Youth: Should Conscientious Objection be an Expression of the SGI-USA's Victory-Over-Violence Initiative?(includes history of the Christian roots of the Conscientious Objector movement)

by Hank Fukui
St. Paul, Minnesota
2003

Melbourne Australia
Associated Press - New York Times,
February 16, 2003

Hank Fukui wrote the following article specifically for young people in the American Buddhist association, Soka Gakkai International-USA (SGI-USA). However, I believe the article pertains to a broad range of readers.

National politicians have started to prepare the reinstatement of the Draft^*1. The Pentagon placed a notice on its web site asking people to serve as members of local draft boards (they are looking for around 2,000 persons in the US.) Since long term deployment of national guards and reservists in Iraq has been under severe criticism, politicians need to find an alternative way to supply fresh solders to the occupied nation of Iraq. The Pentagon prefers volunteer forces because operation of modern weaponry requires longer technical training and morale of troops is much higher in a volunteer force. However, we must keep eye on the political situation regarding this issue because current international policy will cause tremendous stress on our military personnel and they will need some alternative solutions to current volunteer military service.

Once congress passes the resolution, the draft machine will be fully up and running within four days according to the Military Selective Service Act. Then, you, our youth division member, must face, conscientiously, the dilemmas of conscription, military training, and service, and decide your responsible course of action. I would like you to consider that there is an alternative way to express your patriotism other than serving in the military as a Buddhist. In fact, the alternative way, that is, conscientious objection to participating in military training and a war, is a noble and meaningful way to serve your country. John F. Kennedy stated that ‘War will exist until that distant day when conscientious objectors enjoy the same reputation and prestige that the warrior does today." Kennedy was keenly aware that only way to prevent war is to honor those who courageously stand on his or her conscience and reject state-authorized violence.

Nichiren stated that “Life is the foremost of all treasures. It is expounded that even the treasures of the entire major world system cannot equal the value of one's body and life.” (The Writings of Nichiren Daishonin, p. 1125) The reason why life is such an irreplaceable treasure is that the principle of three thousand realms in a single moment of life dictates that every being in this universe possesses the Buddha Nature within the depth of her or his self. Nichiren further proclaimed that “The precept against the killing of living beings is the first among all the various precepts. The five precepts begin with the precept against taking life, and the eight precepts, the ten precepts, the two hundred and fifty precepts, the five hundred precepts, the ten major precepts of the Brahma Net Sutra, the ten inexhaustible precepts of the Flower Garland Sutra, and the ten precepts of the Jeweled Necklace Sutra, all begin with the precept against killing.” (ibid, p. 1019) As a Nichiren Buddhism practitioner, it is overwhelmingly clear to me that we cannot participate in any form of war.

A Conscientious Objector (CO) is a person who, on the grounds of conscience, resists the authority of the state to compel military service. There are three types of COs, 1) Total COs opposed to war in general; 2) Non-combatant COs oppose to war, but in conscience could serve as a non-combatant; 3) Selective COs opposed to a specific war because, in conscience, they understand that specific war to be unjust; 4) War tax objectors refuse to pay defense appropriation portion of Federal Tax. The last two forms of conscientious objection are not recognized in US law. Those COs who reject service even in non-military sections, because these services essentially support war, are some times called absolute objectors and this form of objection is also illegal in the US.

CO movements were initiated by Christians. Originally, they were pacifists, and were therefore, conscientious objectors until the theory of the ‘Just War^*2’ was developed by St. Augustine in the 4^th Century and later by theologians such as St. Thomas Aquinas and Francis Suarez. The roots of the historic peace churches began during the Reformation, where Christians were renewing a voluntary faith (as opposed to state-sponsored religion) that included nonparticipation in warfare. Primary among them were the Anabaptists dating from 1525 in Switzerland, the Netherlands Mennonites in 1536, the Amish began in the late 1600s, and the Quakers (Society of Friends) in the mid-17th century. In the beginning of the 20^th Century, Jehovah’s Witness also objected to participating in wars, not as COs but based on the teaching that all the members of their church are ministers.

In the United States, the history of CO starts with the Revolutionary War. Quakers, Mennonites, and Dunkards would not take the oath of loyalty during the war period. Further, many of Quakers refused to pay taxes, asserting that they support war efforts. During Civil War, the entire administration of the conscription was managed by the US Congress. Those who could find a substitute or pay were exempted in both the Union and Confederate armies. Many COs rejected those conditions. This was the first time, records show, that COs were tortured and imprisoned. During WWI, people who claimed CO status expanded. In addition to the traditional peace church members, such people as political objectors became COs. All COs were sent to Army Camps, prisons, and mental hospitals. Records show that 3,989 men declared themselves to be COs.

During WWII, 72,354 men declared CO status. Many of them served in non-combatant service and Civilian Public Service (CPS), yet 6,086 men went to prison for refusing to cooperate with the Selective Service. 12,000 men served in over 150 CPS camps operated by historic peace churches and the government. Their service included such fields as conservation, forestry, agriculture, firefighter, public health, and surveyor. Those COs provided service without pay. Some of them further volunteered to be subjected to medical experiments. Perhaps, the most notable contribution of COs during this period are those who served in mental hospitals. Many of them noticed inhuman treatment of patients in those hospitals, and they initiated reform movements for the mentally ill.

In 1952, During the Korean War, CPS was transformed into the I-W programs. More than 10,000 COs served in 1,200 institutions and agencies between 1952 to 1955. They worked on experimental farms, did relief and welfare work in Europe, and worked in the fields of education, health service, and social service. Over 170,000 men received CO deferments and 300,000 applicants were denied deferments during the Vietnam Conflict. Noticeably, nearly 600,000 illegally evaded the draft. In the most recent war, The Gulf War, at least 2,500 had sought CO discharges. Of those, at least 42 marines were sentenced to terms of six to 36 months in prison.

Nichiren declared his freedom of spirit over political power saying, “Even if it seems that, because I was born in the ruler’s domain, I follow him in my action, I will never follow him in my heart” (ibid, p. 579); “If you quail before the threats of the ruler of this little island country [and abandon your faith], how will you face the even more terrible anger of Yama, the load of hell?” (ibid, p. 765). Nichiren’s declaration of freedom of thought and conscientious led to his acts of civil disobedience; that is by remonstrating the Kamakua Shogunate government three times for the sake of establishing true security in the nation in spite of endangering his life.

Though attempts were made to question first and second Soka Gakkai presidents Makiguchi's and Toda's anti-militarism stance,^*3evidence clearly indicates that their acts during the Pacific War were that of rejecting to accept the spiritual grounds of the Japanese militarism and imperialistic expansionism.^*4Therefore, the mentor (Makiguchi) and his disciple (Toda) were following our founder’s (Nichiren's) footsteps of civil disobedience by insisting upon the independence of individual conscience and freedom of religion from the State. Their acts strongly echo with the ideals of civil disobedience in the West and other parts of the world; which were developed by individuals such as Hobbs, Rousseau, Tolstoy, Thoreau, Gandhi and King who realized that a ruler’s powers are derived from the voluntary obedience of subjects.

The legal bases for CO are consistent with the independent spirit of Nichiren; that is, the right for life and freedom of thought, conscience, and religion. Currently, there are two levels of legal bases for CO in the U.S.; one on international law and the other on the US statutory rights. The High Commission for Human Rights of the United Nations bases its support for CO on Articles 3 and 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights^*5, Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights^*6, and Article 12 of the American Convention on Human Rights^*7. The United States is the signatory of and has ratified all of the above. In the US Military Selective Service Act, Section 456. Deferments and Exemptions for Training and Service states:

[Conscientious Objectors] Nothing contained in the title (sections 451 to 471a of this Appendix) shall be construed to require any person to be subjected to combatant training and service in the armed forces of the United States who, by reason of religious training and belief, is conscientiously opposed to participation in war in any form. As used in this subsection, the term “religious training and belief” does not include essentially political, sociological, or philosophical views, or a merely personal moral code.

Two Supreme Court cases greatly expanded the “religious training and belief” clause. The first was United States v. Seeger, 380 U.S. 163 (1965) which allows CO status to those who do not believe in a Supreme Being; thus, the agonistic and atheist can claim exemption. The second was Welsh v. United States, 398 U.S. 333 (1970) which allows any individual to object to military service on ethical and moral grounds, if such convictions “are deeply felt.” Prior to these court decisions, CO status was not available to Buddhists who do not believe in a Supreme Being. These more recent decisions, however, allow Buddhism to serve as the foundation for the CO claimant.

Let’s look at international situations regarding CO. In Germany, conscientious objection is completely legal. There were 34,014 agencies and institutions providing 167,000 positions for COs in 1995. Twenty percent of German youth who are eligible for conscription select alternative services based on CO every year. A total of 786,958 people declared CO status from1984 to 1995. COs services are so essential to their social service system that a reduction in CO numbers would cause a tremendous problem in German society. They are much closer to the society that J. F. Kennedy envisioned.

Pictures are not always bright internationally; there are many countries that do not recognize legal rights of COs yet (Only 47 countries legally granted CO status in 1998.) However, in those countries, individuals who believe in the freedom of thought, conscience, and religion are insisting on having their rights. For example, in South Korea, the first CO based on Buddhist belief has been in Jail since 2001. His name is Mr. Oh Tae Yang, a Buddhist and pacifist who rejected service in the South Korean Military based on his conscience. South Korean Military Service law which was enacted in August 1949 states that all men ages 18 to 40 who are not physically handicapped are subject to the draft. They usually serve two to three years depending on the branch of the military. Since the law does not recognize CO status, there are currently 1,600 COs in Jail. Not only are they imprisoned for two to three years, but the stigma follows them when they are released from prison; their conscientious acts will be a black mark for them in society throughout their life. As fellow Buddhists, I strongly believe that the SGI-USA youth must raise a voice for solidarity and act to support for Mr. Oh and others who are fighting for their freedom in different countries.

Christian contributions to the conscientious objection movement and protecting freedom of thought, conscience, and religion are remarkable. Discovery of the individual through the Reformation necessitated that they focus on the internal spiritual life and this focus created a set of values. Ones life, then, became the vehicle to express these values. When their way of living came into conflict with the power of the state, the only option was to refute that power. Though exceptional Buddhist leaders, such as King Asyoka, Makiguchi, the Dali Lama, and Thich Nhat Hanh appear throughout history to articulate Buddhist pacifism, the relationship between individual practice and state power has not been fully comprehended and accepted in our tradition as it has in historic peace Churches. A well known historic fact is that many Buddhist schools in Japan enthusiastically supported, and in some cases, actively promoted the imperial expansionism and invasion of Asia. Nichirenism, an ultra-nationalistic movement of Nichiren Buddhism in Japan, was the philosophical backbone for such key persons as Chigaku Tanaka, Kanji Ishihara, Nissho Inoue, and Ikki Kita. These were the leaders for the movement giving rise to totalitarianism and militarism in early 20^th Century Japan.

What does peace and non-violence means to individual practitioners of Nichiren Buddhism? What can we learn from historic peace churches in the West and the conscientious objection movement in large? My mentor in life, Ikeda, has repeatedly stressed that we must make the state authority relative to individual life as the way to abolish atomic weapons and war. He stated that Nichiren’s teachings serve as the foundation for this action. If his statements are true, is it feasible for practitioners of Nichiren Buddhism to participate in war efforts? Each of you young members of the SGI-USA must answer these questions. I sincerely hope that this essay will be a catalyst to your thinking on this subject.

^*1 A) US Senators McCain (R-AZ) and Lieberman (D-CT) have launched a bipartisan effort to use public service volunteers as homeland security; B) US Rep. Nick Smith (R-MI) and Rep. Curt Weldon (R-PA) have introduced H.R. 3598, a bill to institute universal military service for males of age 18-22; C) US Sen. Ernest Hollings (D-SC) and US Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY) have introduced the universal draft bill to the both houses.

^*2Some “Just war” guidelines include: 1. Force can only be used as a last resort; 2. The war must have as its goal the return to wholeness, health, and peace; 3. Force must be used against solders only – the lives of civilians must be protected; 4. The use of force must be applied with sadness of heart, not vengeful spirit.

^*3For example: Victoria, B. D. 2001. Engaged Buddhism: A Skelton in the Closet? Journal of Global Buddhism. 2:72-91.

^*4 For example: Bethel, D. M. 2003. Two Views of Tunesaburo Makiguchi’s Attitude Toward Japanese Militarism and Education. The Journal of Oriental Studies. 13: 204-211.

Kumagai, K. 2000. Value-Creating Pedagogy and Japanese Education in the Modern Era.

Miyata, K. 2000. Tunesaburo Makiguchi’s Theory of the State. The Journal of Oriental Studies. 10 (Special): 10-19.

________. 2002. Critical Comments on Brian Victora’s “Engaged Buddhism: A Skelton in the Closet?” Journal of Global Buddhism. 3:79-85.

Sato, H. 2000. Nichiren Thought in Modern Japan: Two Perspectives. The Journal of Oriental Studies. 10 (Special):46-61.

Article 18 - Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice worship and observance.

^*6 The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which states:
Article 18

1. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This right shall include freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice, and freedom, either individually or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching.

2. No one shall be subject to coercion which would impair his freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief his choice.

3. Freedom to manifest one’s religion or beliefs may be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary to protect public safety, order, health, or morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others.

4. The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to have respect for the liberty of parents and, when applicable, legal guardians to ensure the religious and moral education of their children in conformity with their own conviction.

About the Author
Hank Fukui says, "I have never been in the military, although I am an associate member of Veterans for Peace. I have been practicing Nichiren Buddhism since 1965 (I am 50 years old). I have Ph. D. in Biology (Evolutionary Genetics), but now own a small business in St. Paul. All of my family members are Buddhists—my wife, daughter and son."