On Nov. 16, the Daily featured a profile of Matthis Chiroux, a veteran of the U.S. Army who served for five years and is now a student at Brooklyn University and an anti−war activist. This article was presented to the Tufts community as part of a feature on veterans past and present, and Mr. Chiroux was portrayed as a typical modern−day veteran unique only for his outspoken objection to our current wars. In fact, Matthis Chiroux is anything but representative of the U.S. Armed Forces; he does not speak and act on my behalf, nor does he represent the vast majority of my brothers and sisters in the services. While he purports to speak for a plurality of veterans, in both word and deed he demonstrates that he speaks only for himself — and the screed he pushes is highly inflammatory and suspect.
The Daily could have interviewed any number of veterans at Tufts and the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy who would have given a balanced and reasoned account of military culture. Additionally, the Alliance Linking Leaders in Education and the Services (ALLIES) is an on−campus student group whose sole purpose is to promote dialogue and understanding between service members and civilians and would have been a valuable source for this feature.
That the Daily's editors gave Matthis Chiroux a solitary platform in the first place is nothing short of outrageous. Even cursory research would have revealed fundamental inconsistencies between his statements, actions and service record which should have immediately tabled any consideration of a profile piece. And while Matthis Chiroux's actual tour of duty deserves acknowledgement, his recent shameful actions and disingenuousness dishonor the legacy of service and sacrifice embodied by past and present members of the Armed Forces.
Chiroux claims to be "living proof that we do not have an all−volunteer army." His blog — matthisresists.us — recounts a drug arrest for possession and distribution in Alabama which led to threats and coercion into service. Military recruiters in years past made offers to young offenders of legal age as a way to improve their lot in life and move on from their poor decisions; I have known more than a few outstanding Marines who were given similar choices and became exemplary leaders. Chiroux mischaracterizes this practice as the rule, not an exception. This twisted tale is in direct contradiction to a profile of Matthis Chiroux in an Opelika and Auburn local newspaper from May 16, 2008 saying, "Matthis Chiroux had it all planned out after he graduated from Auburn High School in 2002. First, he would join the U.S. Army. Then, he would use his G.I. Bill benefits to enroll in college to pursue his dream of becoming a lawyer."
Furthermore, Mr. Chiroux was not simply trying to sell drugs to feed himself; he was distributing psychedelics outside the gates of a local elementary school. Statements by his father Rob Chiroux — himself a Navy veteran — also contradict Matthis' claims that this was an isolated incident, a simple mistake which landed him unwillingly in the U.S. Army. Matthis was in fact a repeat offender who spent significant time in and out of the Lee County juvenile system.
I joined the Marines after making my own poor decisions — either I could fail out of college or I could be proactive and make a serious change in my life. The decision to join was mine alone to make, as it was with Matthis Chiroux. He seeks to displace responsibility for his own actions by saying he was "forced" to join an all−volunteer Army; in actuality he could have chosen to pay the price for violating the law by serving his time in prison, but the military gave him the option to make amends and improve his life. His attempts to shirk responsibility for his crime and for his decision to join are cowardly and reprehensible.
In his blog, he speaks voluminously and hysterically about experiences with alcohol abuse and prostitution in Germany and the Philippines during his tours of service overseas. His stories read like tall tales from someone who saw too many war movies or read Soldier of Fortune Magazine too many times — Chiroux's military has evolved substantially from the days of the Winter Soldier Investigation.
However, Matthis Chiroux is not a war veteran. He is a veteran of the U.S. Armed Forces, but he is not a war veteran. A copy of his service record was obtained through the Freedom of Information Act in 2009 and distributed by Jonn Lilyea, an Army veteran who has tracked Chiroux's antics since 2008. His official discharge paperwork does not contain any record of service in Operation Enduring Freedom. His time as an Army journalist took him to Bagram Air Base, Afghanistan for one week, after which he returned to his permanent duty station thousands of miles away. The Department of Defense does not recognize this as a combat deployment, and neither would any war veteran. Despite this lack of firsthand experience, in April of last year — in yet another publicity stunt — he took it upon himself to personally apologize for the occupation of Afghanistan to Malalai Joya, an Afghan peace activist and member of the Afghan parliament.
I sympathize with his agony over his 2008 recall to active duty after he had begun his college career. While it was in complete legal accordance with the eight−year contract we all sign, it is nonetheless a reprehensible practice which causes a great deal of anguish to veterans who have moved on. And ironically, though he professes disgust and disillusionment with the Army from the very first day of boot camp, the fact that he made the rank of Sergeant is proof that he must have had a decent measure of motivation and competence during his time in service — yet another inconsistency about his professed disenchantment with the military.
In writing this, I only wish to highlight Matthis Chiroux's trail of mendacity and the inappropriateness of the Daily's profile. I do not in any way seek to diminish the importance of real problems within the military and with veterans' care, issues that should be addressed in a responsible, reasoned and respectful way. I applaud those veterans who are courageous enough to voice substantive objections to our current wars in Iraq and Afghanistan because they have the experiences to back up their concerns and they are exercising the rights they essentially gave up during their service. I firmly believe that dissent is patriotic and that we veterans perhaps have more of a responsibility to take a stand and object to injustices committed in the name of freedom and democracy.
But Matthis Chiroux's words and deeds do not add to reasoned public discourse, nor are they designed to. Stunts like burning an American flag or pretending to be waterboarded outside the United Nations are as inflammatory as comparing President Barack Obama to Hitler or Stalin or carrying weapons to a presidential rally, and Matthis Chiroux commits these acts for the sole purpose of garnering attention. Though he has been discredited before, the Daily made the unconscionable decision to give him yet another public forum to use for his own publicity. His words and actions are harmful to the cause of raising awareness and encouraging the dialogue we must have, and the Daily should never have given him such a forum in the first place.
--
CORRECTION: An earlier version of this op-ed incorrectly stated that Chiroux had made public statements regarding seeing dead civilians in a combat zone and, on his blog, spoke about erectile dysfunction. In fact, Chiroux has not made public statements about seeing dead civilians and did not speak on his blog about erectile dysfunction. The op-ed also stated that Chiroux had never gone "outside the wire" — as in he had never left Bagram Air Base, Afghanistan. Chiroux has disputed this, providing the Daily with photographic evidence.
