Panelists Debate ROTC's Return

The most heated policy debate on campus raged on last night at a panel discussion asking "Should ROTC return to Harvard?"

The debate, sponsored by Diversity and Distinction, comes in the midst of an ongoing debate about a bill before the Undergraduate Council endorsing bringing the Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) program back to campus.

The legislation will come before a full council vote at their meeting this Sunday. When the bill was first docketed, many constituents voiced disapproval at a bill they saw as endorsing discrimination against gay students.

ROTC was banned from campus in 1969, with Harvard students involved in ROTC taking classes at MIT instead. In 1994, because officials felt the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy towards gays violated the University's non-discrimination policies.

"I was really dismayed and shocked that this sort of proposal would even make it out of committee," said panelist Anna M. Baldwin '00, a member of several gay activist groups.

Council Vice President Kamil E. Redmond '00 moderated the panel and requested that panelist keep their tempers under control. Last week, over 130 messages were sent to the uc-general newsgroup about the issue.

"We all recognize that this is a charged topic....I look nothing like Jerry Springer, and this is not going to turn into a talk show," Redmond said.

While tensions occasionally ran high, panel and audience members conducted a largely civilized debate surrounding the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy and its relationship to the College's rules about non-discrimination.

"How can we welcome ROTC back on campus?" asked council member and panelist Alex A. Boni-Saenz '01, citing recorded cases of discrimination against gay soldiers and a rising number of soldiers being discharged in the aftermath of the policy's promulgation.

"[Bringing ROTC back] would be a legitimate endorsement of these increasing trends," Boni-Saenz said.

Panelist Alexis B. Karteron '01 agreed.

"I do have great respect for the armed forces," said Karteron, a member of the council and the Coalition Against Sexual Violence. But she said the proposed legislation "practically nullifies" the council's previous efforts against discrimination on campus.

"The U.C. is supposed to discourage discrimination....This will send a message that Harvard student government doesn't care about issues affecting the queer community," Karteron said.

But David A. Campbell '00, a former member of the Bisexual, Gay, Lesbian, Transgender and Supporters Alliance, said that for a school like Harvard, which prides itself on selecting an elite student body, to ban student groups controlling their membership is hypocrisy.

"Who's fooling whom? Every student here is thankful that Byerly Hall discriminates against less intelligent people," Campbell said.

"The current system ROTC has is not unjust. It just requires people to make choices," he continued, calling the agreement between ROTC cadets and the military a "contract" to give up certain rights.

Robert J. Baror '00-'01, a member of the council, said approving the ROTC as a student group would cause no drastic changes.

"We're not talking about people running around in camouflage on the Harvard campus. That's not going to happen," Baror said.

But allowing ROTC to poster and recruit students on the Harvard campus as any other student group can, Baror said, is only fair.

He argued that it is a disservice to students to ban a group from campus that provides such sizable scholarships.

"Knowing about ROTC can mean the difference between having a comfortable college experience or having to scrap all the time and just barely getting by," Baror said.

Jeffery A. Letalien '01, a council representative and a member of the Harvard-Radcliffe Republican Club, argued strenuously that Harvard should not attempt to interfere in matters of military policy.

"The military is not a laboratory for social experimentation, nor should it be," he said.

Several panelists said they were working on a revision of the bill that would be more of a compromise. But Yvonne M. Kao '00, who recently contracted to serve in the Marine Corps after graduation, warned against attempting to dictate changes to established military policies.

"There are different standards expected of those in the military and those who are not," she said.

Others argued that the path to changing discriminatory policies is encouraging students from a diverse university like Harvard to participate in ROTC.

"My liberal education is going to help me a hell of a lot more than studying astrophysics at a military academy," said an audience member who participates in ROTC.

"It would be a very different issue if Harvard students couldn't participate in ROTC at all," Karteron responded. "Just because Harvard doesn't support ROTC doesn't mean that those students aren't getting their liberal education."

Peggy T. Lim '01, executive editor of Diversity and Distinction, said the magazine sponsored the event to provide another open forum for people to talk about the issue.