ALUMNI DIVIDED ON ROTC

On the eve of a decision about the fate of President Neil L. Rudenstine's ROTC compromise proposal, alumni across the nation are evaluating the plan.

In a proposal issued last November and scheduled to be discussed by Harvard's governing boards this month, Rudenstine proposed paying for the program with unsolicited alumni donations earmarked for ROTC.

Rudenstine might be dismayed to know that many alumni aren't happy with the proposal.

Then again, he might be delighted to know that many aren't upset with it.

Indeed, some alumni agree with sentiments expressed by a majority of Harvard's faculty--that any ties to ROTC violate the University's non-discrimination policy because of the military's ban on gays.

Others agree with the opinions of Harvard's administration, who say that the proposal is the best compromise between a total elimination of the ROTC option and an endorsement of a limited ROTC program.

But as the Corporation--Harvard's most powerful governing board--prepares to pass judgment on the proposal, key figures from Harvard's stormy history with the program react almost uniformly when asked about Rudenstine's proposal.

Alumni say they are unaware of the program and unable to make a judgment about it.

The Report

Rudenstine's November 23 Statement on ROTC was an attempt to resolve the most recent in a long series of objections to Harvard's involvement with ROTC.

The latest round began in 1989, when David E. Carney '89 was booted from ROTC after admitting his homosexuality to a commanding officer.

In 1990, the Faculty of Arts and Sciences (FAS) Faculty Council endorsed a statement regarding exclusion of gay students from ROTC service.

The statement recommended that Harvard sever ties to the program in two years if the federal government did not sufficiently resolve the "issues of discrimination."

In 1992, a student-faculty committee, chaired by Pforzheimer University Professor Sidney Verba '53, also recommended that the University eliminate the ROTC option if the military's policy on gays didn't change.

But faculty members decided last year that the current government policy of "don't ask, don't tell" continues to violate Harvard's non-discriminatory policy.

A Middle Ground

In an attempt to alleviate the objections of both sides, Rudenstine has proposed the creation of a special fund. Several alumni have already come forward and offered enough money to fund Harvard's continued involvement with ROTC for the next three or four years, Rudenstine wrote in the proposal.

These funds would be held in a special account--separate from the FAS' general unrestricted funds, but administered by the University, according to Acting President and Provost Albert Carnesale.

Rudenstine's proposal has met with positive reactions from many student groups. Representatives from the Bisexual, Gay and Lesbian Student Alliance and the Civil Liberties Union of Harvard expressed satisfaction with the proposal after its release last December.

But other groups on campus, particularly the faculty, have lambasted the Rudenstine compromise.

At a faculty meeting last month, a majority of those speaking criticized the proposal as being inconsistent with Harvard's nondiscrimination policy.

And Carney, now a student at the Business School, agrees with them.

"My emotional response to this proposal is disappointment," Carney says. "Four years ago, when this whole thing happened, I was one of the strongest advocates of a tempered approach--not serving ties. I got a lot out of the program."

But the Rudenstine proposal isn't acceptable, says Carney.

this would be a good blow quote:

"It seems as though he's trying to get around the University's commitment to only support activities that don't discriminate," Carney says.

Carney's objections to the ROTC program mirror those of the faculty and other groups which oppose the Rudenstine compromise. And interviews with alumni who played important roles in Harvard's stormy history with the program reveal a split that is very much a microcosm of the current debate.

A number of alumni support the compromise. While others oppose it.

Although Rudenstine says alumni will come up with an unsolicited $500,000 for the ROTC compromise, quite a few alumni say they don't know about that plan. Many say they just don't care.

Alumni on ROTC

Twenty six years ago, hundreds of students forcefully took over University Hall and demanded that the University cut all its ties to ROTC.

Back then, students opposed the Vietnam War and ROTC became a casualty of their hatred because it represented an "alliance between the University and the war-makers."

Ultimately, the faculty pushed ROTC off campus and allowed Harvard students to cross-register in ROTC courses at MIT without receiving Harvard credit.

Discrimination by the military wasn't even a consideration of the students of the late 1960s.

"It wasn't an issue back then," says Kenneth M. Glazier '69, who chaired the Student-Faculty Advisory Council as an undergraduate.

But for many of the alumni who protested against ROTC in the late 1960s, the military's policy on gays is definitely a relevant issue today.

Richard E. Hyland '69, who chaired the discussion of the 450 students who took over University Hall in 1969, recalls an incident at last June's 25th reunion exercises.

At the very first meeting of the week, Hyland says, alumni gathered in Sanders Theatre to question Rudenstine, Dean of the Faculty Jeremy R. Knowles and other prominent University officials.

The most oft-expressed concern of the members of his class, according to Hyland, was Harvard's treatment of the ROTC issue in light of the military's continuing discriminatory practices.

Hyland says Rudenstine and the other administrators defended Harvard's record with the program.

"Their argument was that 'everything you've asked us to do [regarding ROTC], we've done,'" Hyland says.

Rudenstine and other officials assured the alumni that the issue would "be resolved in an appropriate manner," Hyland says.

The Class of '69, Hyland notes, went on to break records for alumni donations--largely because of contributions made that week.

But Hyland believes that the University wasn't playing it straight with the alumni that day.

"They got benefit out of it," charges Hyland, who is now a professor of law at Rutgers University. "For them now to come back and [make the current proposal], it does violate the spirit of the kind of communication that we were making in Sanders."

Other members of the Class of '69 interviewed by The Crimson could neither confirm nor deny Hyland's account of the discussion in Sanders that day. But they say they're still upset with their alma mater.

Some oppose Harvard's ties with ROTC for the very same reasons they did in the 1960s. They say they view excessive entanglement with the military as inappropriate for a university.

James T. Kilbreth '69, who was arrested in the University Hall takeover, terms the Rudenstine compromise "a step in the right direction."

But Kilbreth still questions any University involvement. blow quote??

"I think this is another kind of illustration of what seems to me to be the larger question," Kilbreth says. "Do you want the University to be that entangled with the military?"

Former SFAC chair Glazier agrees that the military does not belong on campus.

"I never thought that ROTC had any place in [this] environment," he says. "It sounds to me like the faculty are the ones who have it figured out right."

Still, he commended the Rudenstine compromise as "reasonable."

Glazier and Kilbreth aren't alone in criticizing the University's involvement with the program while praising the Rudenstine compromise.

Robb Bettiker is a 1990 graduate of MIT who, like Carney, was kicked out of ROTC after confessing his homosexuality to a commanding officer.

Bettiker praises Rudenstine's solution as caring and pragmatic.

"He clearly cares about this," Bettiker says. "Overall, I think it's pretty good. I feel good about it because he's doing something, he's looking at the issue, and it looks like he's not taking the easy way out."

Leo Corbett '70 also says he approves of the Rudenstine compromise, but says he has a different perspective.

As an undergraduate, Corbett was chair of the Kirkland House Committee and a strong supporter of Harvard's own ROTC program. In the 1960s, Corbett says, he helped assemble counter-protest groups to "block various radical students" from protesting.

Today, Corbett still advocates the return of ROTC to Harvard's campus.

But the Rudenstine solution is still workable, Corbett says.

"He's obviously trying to preserve the ROTC option," Corbett says of the president, who served in Army ROTC as an undergraduate at Princeton. "I think we should give students the ROTC option. I would object to the faculty's position."

Corbett says that denying students the right to participate in the program is meaningless.

"I still think it's a wonderful program, great for college students all over the country," Corbett says. "Objection to particular policies is different from taking away [access to beneficial programs]; they're only hurting the students."

Corbett says Harvard's has a small role to play in the course of a national debate over gays in the military.

"Harvard University taking...leftist political positions is of no consequence," Corbett adds. "It's totally out of the mainstream of American politics."

But other alums dispute that conclusion. They argue that the key flaw in Rudenstine's argument is his assumption that Harvard's actions won't make a difference on the national scene.

"It's certainly not going to change if people don't stand up to it," Hyland says of the military's policy on gays. "Especially in universities, which have become, in a certain way, the holders of the moral conscience of the country."

Carney agrees that Rudenstine is mischaracterizing the impact Harvard could potentially have.

"I think Rudenstine underestimates the influence the school could have by severing ties," Carney says. "The program at Harvard and MIT is important to the [military, sending them] some of their best and brightest."

"The armed forces would notice," Carney says. "They may not change their policies, but they'll notice."

Carney adds that by cutting ties, Harvard might make it easier for other schools--including MIT itself--to do the same. (MIT has established a committee that will review its ties to ROTC. That committee will convene this coming fall).

But Barrington Moore Jr., who was a lecturer in sociology back then, disagrees.

"I thought the whole business was grossly overblown because it has to do with Harvard," he says. "Harvard grossly exaggerates its influence in all fields."

Still, most alums interviewed, like most students on campus, neither support nor oppose with the report, simply because they didn't know enough about it.

The overwhelming majority of alumni interviewed by The Crimson aren't even aware that Rudenstine had passed down a compromise proposal on ROTC.

That might be because news of the compromise was buried in a short blurb in Harvard magazine.

"It is downplayed," Hyland suggests.

Aside from Carney, all those who commented on the proposal did so only after The Crimson faxed them a copy of the statement or read them key selections.