Military training in our communities sets a bad precedent | Guest Viewpoint

Most people recognize the need for adequate training of our military personnel, and appreciate the service and sacrifice of generations of men and women in uniform.

But it’s also good citizenship to point out when those training activities conflict with environmental laws and public health and safety.

The Navy owns 46 miles of shoreline and 151,975 acres of land in the Pacific Northwest, but they want to conduct “realistic” covert combat training along 265 miles of western Puget Sound shoreline, using private lands and state parks. The entire northern half of Bainbridge Island’s shoreline is included.

Training features mock gun battles and other actions.

Navy officials confirmed that unsuspecting civilians will be proxies for the enemy. At an open house in February they told shocked listeners, “You will not be shown boundaries or shut out when the Navy is conducting an exercise, so you may wander unawares into a secret military exercise, uninformed that by doing so, you are a participant.”

Another added, “The point is to be able to watch and track whoever comes through, you, the public, ‘the enemy,’ without your awareness, whether you’re walking, fishing, enjoying nature or otherwise going about your business.” Also: gunfire will supposedly be distinguishable by civilians as the sound of air rifles, not real weapons.

The dismal regularity of school shootings and the fact that so many shooters wear military-style clothing makes the sight of, or even the thought of, encountering armed combatants who may appear unexpectedly, or who may be hiding in state parks or on private land adjacent to properties that have children and pets, of great concern.

And what happens if an armed civilian who encounters an exercise initiates gunfire with real bullets?

The Navy has been silent about this possibility, and also this: in North Carolina a sheriff’s deputy shot two trainees during Operation Robin Sage, killing one. A lawsuit ended with the community forfeiting $750,000 in damages.

The Navy’s Environmental Assessment says 84 personnel will train annually, but Navy officials later said it’s 504. An email from the governor’s office worried about the possibility of 2,000.

Physical risks aside, trainees will use aerial and surface drones carrying “payloads” of technical equipment with data-capture and recording capability. Fourth Amendment concerns about random electronic surveillance of people who are not the subject of a warrant or not suspected of terrorism have not been addressed. The Navy has dismissed any chilling effects on enjoyment of our wonderful state park system, and potential declines in adjacent private property values. Federal and state laws and zoning restrictions that conflict with using our communities for military training have not been addressed. Normalizing military combat training in our communities sets a dangerous precedent.

A former naval officer whom the Navy hires for outreach told a live radio audience on KSER 90.7 and KXIR 88.9 in Everett on June 19, 2015, “the citizens of the area are collateral damage in the war on terror.” As bad as that sounds, he wasn’t exaggerating.

Karen Sullivan is a retired U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service biologist who co-founded the West Coast Action Alliance in response to recent expansions of military activities on public lands and in civilian communities. The comment period on the proposed training closes March 23. For details, see WestCoastActionAlliance.org.

Tags: