Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
we will vacate and remand for new findings if the agency’s reasoning or its fact-finding process was sufficiently flawed. See Cao He Lin v. DOJ, 428 F.3d 391, 406 (2d Cir.2005). Because the IJ found that Veretelnikov was credible and the BIA did not disturb that finding, we assume his credibility. See Yan Chen, 417 F.3d at 271-72. We conclude that the BIA properly reversed the IJ’s grant of the petitioners’ application for asylum. Even assuming that Veretelnikov had established that the treatment he faced at the hands of the Uzbekistani government was on account of a protected ground, he failed to establish that “any future punishment for his failure to perform mandatory military service for which he contracted constitutes persecution.” See In re A-G- 19 I. & N. Dec. 502 (BIA 1987) . As the BIA found, “in light of the
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that it may not
B. holding military service disability payments are community property
C. holding that under the 1948 version of csrs civil servants were required to meet the fiveyear service requirement exclusive of military service 
D. holding that a former spouse is a proportionate owner of the other spouses future military retirement pay and is thus entitled to onehalf of the percentage of such pay representing the number of military marriage years relative to the total length of military service
E. holding that a government may require military service and may enforce that requirement using reasonable sanctions
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.