The Right Kind of Conversation

In anticipation of the upcoming survey, the undergraduate class councils hosted a forum last night to discuss the possibility of allowing NROTC at the University. The format of the forum allowed for a structured conversation to take place and should be used as an example for future discussions of contentious campus issues. It is unfortunate that the initially planned second debate can no longer take place, but last night’s event succeeded at offering each side a chance to voice their opinions.

Following complaints concerning transparency and clarity surrounding the way that the councils have discussed NROTC with students, the forum, hosted in Sulzberger Parlor, was a step in the right direction. Both sides—those in favor of and those opposed to allowing NROTC to return—had seven minutes to present opening statements. Following that, for a little over 30 minutes, each side took turns responding to three questions chosen in advance. A significant portion of time was allocated for audience questions, and then each side had five minutes for closing statements. Barnard Student Government Association President Sarah Besnoff, BC ’09, moderated successfully by enforcing the predetermined format of the debate. The groups attempted to address the potential impact of NROTC on campus life, Columbia’s general role in relation to federal policies, and where “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” fits into the discussion. One emerging issue, which the two sides returned to multiple times, was whether bringing NROTC to campus would help or harm efforts to eliminate DADT. A structured forum for student dialogue, such as last night’s, is important for a campus like Columbia’s that encounters many complex issues.

While some students will still find it difficult to draw conclusions, the forum offered a glimpse into many of the rationales from both sides of a complex debate. Ultimately, undecided students should continue to consider the implications of NROTC on campus if they plan to vote next week.