NROTC Forum Previews Survey Opinion

As the date approaches of the survey to gauge student opinion on the possible return of the Naval Reserve Officer Training Corps, the first organized discussion of the issue raised criticism that ran the gamut from predatory recruitment practices to discriminatory policies.

At Tuesday’s event, titled “Voices on ROTC: Exploring diverse implications of ROTC and Columbia University,” three panelists gave short speeches followed by a lengthy question-and-answer session. The discussion, which organizers said intended to take an anti-ROTC approach, came exactly two months after the ServiceNation Forum publicized the presiding issue, and a week before the student councils will hold forums debating whether or not the University should allow NROTC on campus. The forums will precede the campus-wide survey that is planned for sometime the following week, just before Thanksgiving. According to organizers of the survey, the poll will ask students to simply indicate their support or opposition to a reversal of the University’s long-standing ban on ROTC groups.

The event organizers were unapologetic about the anti-ROTC sentiment widely expressed at the event. “We have a point. and we don’t want ROTC coming back,” Ryan Kasdin, CC ’09 and co-president of Everyone Allied Against Homophobia (EAAH) said. However, Kasdin also said he hoped the event would inspire both sides of the debate to make their voices heard. “My biggest fear is that there will not be discussion on the topic,” he added.

The question-and-answer session, to which half the event was dedicated, allowed others to voice their questions and comments, giving the evening a wider range of campus opinions. Some asked about activist strategies in confronting ROTC in the current debate on campus. Some students who had graduated from the ROTC program also commented and asked questions, emphasizing their disapproval of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and challenging the panelists on some of their assertions.

The talk began around the issue of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” but also highlighted the various other issues at stake. The three speakers each touched on a different argument against lifting the ban on the ROTC. First, Core Lecturer David Eisenbach argued that unless the military repeals the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy, the ROTC is discriminatory and therefore should not be permitted on campus. Eisenbach did suggest that he thinks that if DADT were to be repealed, Columbia would allow ROTC to return to
campus.

Manuel Schwab, a student in the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, said that recruitment officers with ROTC have been candid about their targeting of racial and ethnic minorities, as well as those in lower-income brackets, on the basis of supporting affirmative action. But he said that the percentage of minorities that rise to higher levels of authority in the institution is very small.

Citing the Solomon Amendment, which allows the federal government to withhold funding from schools that don’t allow ROTC on campus, Schwab also stated that the NROTC debate can also be viewed in terms of “solidarity” with higher education institutions that have closer ties to ROTC. He said that, given the size of Columbia’s endowment, the school can technically “afford” to reject ROTC, and is better placed than smaller schools to lose federal funding as per the Solomon law. Later in the Q&A, Schwab added that while “democratizing the military” would constitute an improvement over presiding inequalities in the military’s chain of command, students should also evaluate their views on war itself.

Claudia de la Cruz, a member of the community organization in Washington Heights named Da Urban Butterflies, argued that the military is an organization driven by white male supremacy and is able to easily recruit racial minorities and less privileged socio-economic groups who see no other way to support themselves financially and occupationally. De la Cruz expressed displeasure with the argument that ROTC empowers individuals financially or personally, adding that financial aid for education should not involve placing a life at risk.

Eight student groups—Everyone Allied Against Homophobia, Chicano Caucus, Columbia Coalition Against the War, Columbia Queer Alliance, Students for a Democratic Society, Lucha, Columbia University College Democrats, and Proud Colors—co-sponsored the event and distributed statements from each group. Seven of the groups, all but the CQA, were excluded from a meeting earlier this semester in which student organizers discussed the logistics of polling students on their opinion of ROTC presence on campus. Though students have criticized the way planning has been handled, Tuesday’s event focused on the issue and, if anything, looked outside of campus, rather than focusing on internal squabbles.

“We wanted to use this forum as an opportunity to explore the many facets of ROTC-related issues,” said the introduction to the packet of position statements.

“These include—but are not limited to—race and ethnic communities, sexual orientation, gender dynamics, and socio-economics.”

news@columbiaspectator.com