DS9: For the Uniform

Post Reply New Topic

What do you think about this episode of DS9.

In this episode capitain Sisko fired bio weapon on Maquis colony, i think Sisko overstepped his authority to capture Eddington, and commit crime himself.

I does not understand why the crew listened to him at all.
After all, solider have the right and duty to refuse to perform a criminal order, i doubt that changed in future

This episode is one of the reasons I like DS9 so much more than the other iterations of Star Trek. It's very challenging and a bit troubling.

The episode illustrates the ruthless nature of 'total conflict.' Eddington was willing to go to any length to achieve his goals. Sisko has a choice. He can either let Eddington go again or drop the gloves and do whatever it takes to stop him.

Certainly, what Sisko did was not right, but it was the only way to stop Eddington. I think Sisko's officers understood this and that's why they supported his actions. It was a case of the ends justifying the means.

Also, the conflict between Eddington and the Maquis and Sisko and his staff had become very personal. Generally, the more personal a conflict becomes, the nastier it gets.

This sort of honest illustration about the nature of conflict and the toll it demands from the participants is something that DS9 does really well.

A real world analog to this would be Allied strategic bombing during WWII. As Curtis LeMay, commander of USAAF in the Pacific theater, once noted, if the Allies had lost, he would have surely been prosecuted for war crimes. LeMay was fully aware that he was ordering his forces to commit atrocities (like firebombing civilians), but he gave the orders anyway and his bomber crews obeyed because that is what rapid victory demanded.

That's the nature of conflict. It's not nice.

In large part, IIRC, the planet was not highly populated. Sisko's actions made the planet uninhabitable for a finite time period, but the people could evac in time after the deed was done.

He was gambling that Eddington would sacrifice himself to stop him from harming innocents. Had Sisko been wrong, it could have gotten ugly.

^^^ Come now.... That's a bit harsh, don't you think?

What Sisko did was certainly not admirable but it was not the height of villainy either.
Unlike other Star Trek leads, Sisko is a flawed man doing the best he can in an imperfect universe. Other lead characters are never even put in the kinds of impossible situations Sisko faces.

What would Picard do in this situation? Most likely he'd make some pompous finger-wagging speech, refuse to take action and allow Eddington to disrupt the entire region and start a war... (or he'd have some magical, unrealistic solution).

To be sure, there's a degree of personal "payback" driving Sisko's actions here, but there's also a service to the greater good....

The difference between Sisko and Leyton or Dukat is that ultimately what Sisko does is selfless, while the actions of the other two are selfish.
Leyton and Dukat are both megalomaniacs who think they should be in charge because they know what's best for us poor dumb bastards.

By contrast, in this episode and even more in "In The Pale Moonlight." Sisko is just doing the "hard thing" for the greater good... he's sacrificing his clean conscience to preserve the Federation.

As I said before, Sisko's actions are not heroic, but I think they were necessary and certainly not villainous. Conflict, when examined in a more realistic way, is not pretty, or neatly solved. DS9 is great at showing this in a way that other Star Trek series do not.

Eddington committed himself and the rest of the Maquis in that episode by attacking two federation starships. That proved the Maqui were a serious threat to Federation security, so Sisko's actions were justified.