This page seeks to centralize information relevant to the NROTC survey to be
distributed to the undergraduate community on November 24th, as well as
information about the history of the debate.
Who are we?
Columbia Students for NROTC is a coalition made up of individuals, and has no
affiliation with any group on campus. It includes Democrats, Republicans,
Independents, Obama-voters, McCain-voters, veterans, students currently enrolled
in Army ROTC at Fordham, students not affiliated with the military at all, gay
students, and straight students. If students are interested in joining this
coalition, they should email
ColumbiaNROTC@gmail.com.
What is NROTC?
The Reserve Officers Training Corps produces over 60% of all Armed Forces Officers. It is designed as a college elective that can be tried for up to two years with no obligation. The program provides a wide range of experiences, combining military science classes with hands-on leadership experience. Columbia University housed a Naval Training Program on campus since 1916, and NROTC since the 1940s, and graduated thousands of midshipmen to the U.S. Navy. Students in the program took part in Naval Science classes, studied on ships and submarines in New York's harbor, and provided community service in Manhattan and the Morningside Heights area. The Navy in turn provided students with scholarships, allowing many to afford a Columbia education when they normally would not have been able to. NROTC was expelled in 1969, during the war in Vietnam, partly as a result of disagreement over faculty appointments and the application of course credit. The expulsion occurred at a time of great civil unrest on Columbia's campus, with the riots and student takeover of the campus in April of '68.
Why has this debate resurfaced in 2008?
The debate resurfaced when SEAS students approached members of the Engineering
Student Council about the possibility of receiving scholarships through the
Naval Reserve Officer Training Corps. Several of the Senate’s reasons for not
extending an invitation to ROTC did not apply to the NROTC, which (unlike Army ROTC
and Air Force ROTC) has no program available to Columbia students.
In September during the
ServiceNation Summit, both Barack Obama and John McCain endorsed bringing
ROTC back to the Columbia campus, and their statements reignited student debate
on these important issues. President-elect Barack Obama has taken stances on the
central issues of this debate—including ROTC at Columbia, Don’t Ask Don’t Tell,
and the Solomon Amendment. During this time of political change, it is essential
that students educate themselves as to what’s at stake.
When do we vote?
On November 24th, undergraduate students will receive a survey via e-mail.
Students will vote online. The Columbia College version of the question
is: "Do you support bringing a Naval ROTC program to Columbia's campus?"
There will be two forums sponsored by the councils during the week of November
17th. One will take place at Barnard and one at Columbia, with both using a pro
vs. con setup. This means that there will be even representation for both sides
of the argument and then questions about specific topics will be asked of the
panel to stimulate conversation and inform the students attending the panels
about NROTC. We will provide more information on time and location as the
councils release it.
Debate will continue to take place during the week, and voting begins on
November 24th.
President Bollinger sent an e-mail saying that the Senate already discussed
the issue in 2005. Does this mean the debate is pointless?
The full text of President Bollinger’s e-mail is at
this link.
1. Bollinger refers to "ROTC sites at Fordham and St. John's," but there is in
fact no Naval ROTC program available to Columbia students. The ROTC
programs available to Columbia students are listed
here.
2. Bollinger says that, "as the Wall Street Journal reported last year, the
Department of Defense (DOD) has, for its own fiscal reasons, instituted a policy
of aggregating small numbers of ROTC students in urban areas." However, this
article
(available free
here)
argues that this policy actually makes ROTC less effective.
3. Bollinger says that "we will not have programs on the campus that
discriminate against students on the basis of such categories as race, gender,
military veteran status, or sexual orientation." However, we believe that
boycotting all discriminatory programs does little to change these programs for
the better. Students at Columbia study in countries where homosexuality itself
is against the law, and important groups like the Red Cross (which discriminates
by preventing gay men from donating blood) also work on campus. The military too
is a necessary institution of any country, and Columbia students could work to
improve the climate of the American military.
4. Bollinger says that, "under the current "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy of the
Defense Department, openly gay and lesbian students could or would be excluded
from participating in ROTC activities." This is not merely a Department of
Defense policy, but mandated by a
law enacted by Congress and signed by President
Clinton. DADT can only be overturned by passing a new law or by the
Supreme Court overturning the existing law.
A small number of Columbia students are currently enrolled in ROTC programs. Does this demonstrate a lack of interest that might prevent the military from
reinstalling NROTC?
An invitation from Columbia to the military would not automatically cause the
military to place an ROTC program at Columbia. As with considering any
investment, the military would have to first evaluate Columbia as a prospect. However, an invitation from the university is a necessary step for the military
to begin considering Columbia for an ROTC program. Regarding the number of
current cadets, the outsider reject status assigned to ROTC at Columbia,
distance and poor access, lack of exposure, and lack of institutional
cooperation may be causative factors for the low number of Columbia students
enrolled in ROTC. Even now, prior to their arrival, a number of incoming first
year undergraduates at Columbia inquire whether they are eligible for ROTC
support at one or more of the New York area ROTC programs.
The article
in Wall Street Journal mentioned by President Bollinger (available free
here)
criticizes the military for the ROTC arrangement used in New York City, which
places ROTC on the outskirts of the city's student population centers. It is
highly questionable whether the military's current placement of ROTC 'hubs',
designed for dispersed rural regions, adequately serves a dense, concentrated
metropolis like New York City. In addition, the
statistics accompanying the Wall Street Journal article demonstrate the
necessity of more urban recruiting.
President-elect Barack Obama has also dealt with this issue repeatedly. During a
January 15th debate he
said that “One of the striking things, as you travel around the country, you
go into rural communities and you see how disproportionally they are carrying
the load in this war in Iraq, as well as Afghanistan.” During the
ServiceNation Summit at Columbia University he
said that “it’s also important that a president speaks to military service
as an obligation not just of some, but of many. You know, I traveled, obviously,
a lot over the last 19 months. And if you go to small towns, throughout the
Midwest or the Southwest or the South, every town has tons of young people who
are serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. That’s not always the case in other parts
of the country, in more urban centers. And I think it’s important for the
president to say, this is an important obligation. If we are going into war,
then all of us go, not just some.”
Does NROTC exclude LGBT students?
Openly gay students will not necessarily be excluded from the ROTC classes
(though they would be banned from enrolling in the military due to federal
law). They could, however, lose the NROTC scholarship. Universities such as
MIT have therefore
created a fund to support its gay students in ROTC programs. As other
schools have done, Columbia could create a contingency plan to financially
protect students who may be affected by Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.
More information
The Advocates for ROTC Web site provides a detailed history of the controversy surrounding the relationship between Columbia and the military for the past several decades. Of particular interest are Professor Allan Silver’s October 2008 article “When and Why ROTC Should Return to Columbia” and Spectator op-ed "Why ROTC Should Return to Columbia". We also have Response to ROTC Posters with photos of posters by the coalition opposing return of ROTC to Columbia accompanied by an analysis of the arguments made in the posters.