BY LAUREN SCHULZ
New York – Short black hair, petite build, arms at her side, wearing a pressed white shirt and long skirt, Edith Parks, from the School of Continuing Education, stepped up to the microphone after waiting her turn in the long line. Her hands were shaking slightly as she told the crowd of over 400 people in Altshul Auditorium, “we lead by example – I am not an airborne ranger but I am airborne qualified, I am not an infantry woman because there is no such thing as one.” Her voice waivered as her nervousness took over, rendering her almost speechless and as a few seconds passed she continued to say “ROTC doesn’t really make warmongers and I was never taught how to point a rifle at a college student, nor would I ever order my soldiers too.”
If it is possible to have something quieter than silence, the students, faculty and alumni experienced it last week for a few moments at the third and final debate on ROTC.
It was hard for Parks to get her words out, but much easier for others. For over two hours on February 23, 47 members of the Columbia University community, both advocates and opponents for ROTC, stepped up to the microphone to speak to the Military Engagement Task Force in a packed auditorium. Some had been at all three debates, while others were new to the forum.
Outside the auditorium stood three campus security officers while students, faculty and alumni entered. Less then 10 minutes after the start of the debate, Altshul was at full capacity. After approximately 40 minutes of debate, Ron Mazor, the Task Force co-chair, told the audience that the lines needed to be cut off because they were already running out of time for each person to speak.
The divide among students, faculty and alumni was almost evenly split. Twenty-three people spoke in favor of the return of ROTC to campus while 24 spoke out against it. Some chose to speak loudly with a lot of passion, while others stayed calm and collective.
Two PH D students, from the Departments’ of History and Anthropology, joined the microphone together and expressed their opinion by echoing a poem. Their lyrical expression was very different from the previous debates but their message was clear. They said that by supporting ROTC on campus, the university and its community would be supporting the ongoing war in Iraq. Repeating one after the other, they said they would not allow for the university to support an organization that supplies weapons and funding to bomb countries and kill children. They said, “not by our will, not by our will, and not in our name, not in our name, we pledge resistance to ROTC, we pledge resistance to ROTC.”
As the third debate continued on, some of the issues remained the same except for one. The actual process of the task force was now under attack. Several students and faculty accused the task force as being undemocratic and lacking transparency.
Roslyn Morris, Professor from the Department of Anthropology, said she and many others at the debate were “extremely distressed by the procedures of this task force, its lack of transparency and the lack of transparency about the status of its advice to the senate,” and a failure on part of the task force to provide information on how the task force was formed.
The panel did not defend their position but rather let the discourse continue. They said at the beginning of the hearing that they were only there to listen.
The debate began with opening remarks by Claude Steele, Provost of Columbia and Professor of Psychology just after members of the task force handed out memo’s with the schools discrimination policy on one side and the latest message from President Bollinger regarding ROTC on the other.
The task force was formed shortly after congress announced the repeal of “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.” Currently only Princeton and Cornell, of all Ivy League schools, have an ROTC program on their campus.
Mazor said the task force would prepare a report by March 4 and present to the University Senate for a vote on either April 15 or April 29.
The senate released a student survey and accepted emails through their website to record opinions regarding the school’s participation in ROTC.
Once the report is reviewed and voted on by the University Senate, the President of Columbia University will make a final decision. However a deadline has not been set.
Columbia University has a long history educating military leaders dating back to the 1700s. During World War II Columbia trained more than 20,000 naval officers, at one point rivaling the United States Naval Academy.
The Navy cancelled its ROTC program in 1968 after vehement anti-war protests shook Columbia.
In 1974, a special committee voted to allow ROTC on campus as an extracurricular activity but the Navy did not return.
Almost 30 years later in 2003, a referendum to the student elections ballot was sent to out in to poll student opinion. Sixty-five percent of students were in favor of bringing back ROTC while thirty-five percent were opposed. This was an unofficial poll and no action was taken.
John McClelland, former president of the MilVets Student Group at Columbia said he thinks that the vote for ROTC will pass this year. McClelland is a combat veteran and ROTC cadet who travels to Fordham University to fulfill his training responsibilities.
McClelland has been an advocate for ROTC since he began studying at Columbia and spoke passionately at the first debate. He believes a program on campus will demystify what the military is about and will be a “symbolic victory to not look back at 1968 but to look forward.”
There are nine other Columbia students like McClelland who are enrolled in the ROTC program, and travel to Fordham and Manhattan College for the program.
Although the university does not currently support the ROTC program on campus, it does support the students who want to participate at other schools.
Columbia also allows military recruiting on campus and has taken advantage of Department of Defense Basic Research funding.
Now that the three debates are complete, the survey was submitted and over 100 students have emailed the task force, it will be up to the school senate and President Bollinger to decide the fate of ROTC on campus.